How many of you are ex-diehard Obama lovers

Johnnyorganic said:

The doctor makes the decision. Always has.

The 'corporate bureaucrat' determines if the company has an obligation to pay for the procedure based on the level of coverage purchased.

What is truly scary is a scheme incorporating the doctor into the government bureaucracy. Which is the ultimate goal of the single payer system.

Which is why it was rejected by the people.

And the half-measures currently under consideration are not fooling anybody but the true believers, a.k.a. saps.

Click to expand...

If you are on Medicare which is single payer and they deny to cover a procedure, you still have the right to have the procedure so long as you pay out of pocket. I assume by "scheme to incorporate doctors into government bureaucracy" you are referring to a VA or UK type socialized system. That IS NOT what single payer is. That is not even being proposed by even the most liberal of law makers. Even if it was, that still wouldn't prevent you from paying out of pocket if you so choose. Even in the UK which has the most socialized system in the western world, many people still have private insurance and have the freedom to have elective procedures.

Wouldn't such denials make you happy since in your opinion the government isn't responsible for your medical care anyway? Aetna and Blue Cross wouldn't be going anywhere. You could still have supplemental insurance and just hope they pay for the procedure you want.

So again, why should I be any more worried about a government bureaucrat deciding what procedures my insurance will cover any more than a corporate bureaucrat? Also, how does it matter since single payer isn't even on the table.? LOL We can't even get a public option. I don't know where you think single payer would come from.

Johnnyorganic said:

Sensible regulation would naturally include tort reform and provisions allowing health insurance companies to offer their products across state lines.

But for some reason, the Proggies refuse to consider real reforms which would actually reduce cost.

Click to expand...

OK, tell me this. How is tort reform and buying over state lines going to help a middle class person who has a history of cancer and was dropped by their previous insurance company? No amount of tort reform or buying over state lines is going to do anything for someone who insurance companies DO NOT WANT because they are too big of a risk. Even if they do get insurance, how sustainable do you think a 4 figure per month insurance premium is for a middle class person?

Don't get me wrong. I am a big believer in tort reform and believe it should have been part of this reform along with a public option! As for buying over state lines, that is just a very weak talking point. For starters, most of the big insurance companies are available over state lines. Most of these companies simply have a subsidiary available to those states which follow those state guidelines. Also just because there may be over a thousand insurance companies doesn't mean it isn't the same few mega insurers flipping the bill. You may buy your insurance from Joe BlahBlah Insurance, Inc in Cleveland Ohio. But with so much capital needed to run these programs, there is a good chance they are simply a reseller for a Blue Cross or UHC type insurer.
Not to mention those who preach "states rights" are now wanting the federal government to override the states own insurance standards.

Johnnyorganic said:

Sensible regulation would naturally include tort reform and provisions allowing health insurance companies to offer their products across state lines.

But for some reason, the Proggies refuse to consider real reforms which would actually reduce cost.

Click to expand...

Wow, and to think I was giving you credit as being somewhat informed and non-partisan. This statement blows both of those theories....

I am for TORT reform, but it will not fix shit by itself and it will not bend the long term cost curve. And crossing state lines? What, so the insurance companies could cherrypick the healthiest folks in each state?

How about doing what every other rich capitalist democracy does, ie bar insurers from making profits, force them to accept everyone, a mandate for all citizens to get insurance or pay a fine, and negotiating on an annual basis the costs for certain procedures.

CrackerJax said:

It's a false analogy and the two are not comparable. Apples and Oranges.

What can and what cannot be done? As in what as an example.... to either put a fire out or not?

As opposed to what medical procedure you can have determined by the govt.?

Laughable.

Click to expand...

OK now you showed how dumb you really are ....example??? ok here you go check it yourself.. in 1994, faced with a national crime crisis, Congress passed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (Crime Bill), which provided federal funds to allow state and local law enforcement to hire additional police officers. The results were dramatic: between 1994 and 2001, violent crime dropped by 29 percent, the most sustained decline in 40 years....so in fact Cracker Federal funding ( not state ) was used to determine what could or could not be done...Once again you have failed...How many times will you have to repeat this damn class

Let's just cut to the chase....

Here is a compilation.....


Why Health Bill Makes No Sense

Posted 03/12/2010 07:12 PM ET (IBD)

Health Reform: So it's come down to this — desperate Democratic leaders strong-arming members on the worst bill ever before they go home to explain to constituents why they decided to commit political suicide.
We've said just about all we've had to say on this issue — actually dating back to 1993-94, when we wrote nearly 100 editorials in opposition to HillaryCare. Since January of last year, we've weighed in 150 more times against the latest version of socialized medicine.
But to review, here are just 15 reasons why a government takeover of the finest medical system in the world makes no sense at all:
1. The people don't want it! This, we would think, should have some bearing on decision-making. Yet the Democrats forge ahead without consent of the governed. In the latest Rasmussen poll, 53% opposed the Democrats' reform while 42% were in favor. More than four in 10 "strongly" opposed; just two in 10 "strongly" favored. This jibes with other surveys, including our own IBD/TIPP Poll, taken since last year.

2. Doctors don't want it! A survey we took last summer of 1,376 practicing physicians found that 45% would consider leaving their practices or taking early retirements if the Democrats' reform became law. In December, the results were validated by a Medicus poll in which 25% of doctors said they'd retire early if a public option is implemented and another 21% would stop practicing even though they were far from their retirement years. Even if the bill doesn't have a "public option," nearly 30% said they'd quit the profession under the plans being considered.

3. Half the Congress doesn't want it! Not a single Republican backed the health care bill that cleared the Senate on Christmas Eve 60-39. House passage was by a slim 220 to 215, and the lone Republican "aye" has since switched to "no." Columnist Michael Barone says other changes would put the House vote today at 216-215 in favor, and he has doubts Democrats can even muster 216.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made her job of securing yes votes even more difficult last week when she told a meeting of county officials that "we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it." Members of Congress aren't waiting: They've already exempted themselves from whatever they inflict on us.

4. People are happy with the health care they've got! Polls show that 84% of Americans have health insurance and that few are displeased with what they've got. Last month, the St. Petersburg Times looked at eight polls and reported that satisfaction rates averaged 87%.

5. It doesn't even cover the people they set out to cover! Supporters of government-run health care say there are as many as 47 million Americans — 9 million to 10 million of them illegal aliens — without medical insurance. The Democrats' plans, however, will put only 31 million of the uninsured under coverage.

6. Costs will go up, not down! Democrats say their plans will cost less than $1 trillion over the first decade. But analyst Michael Cannon at the Cato Institute puts the cost at $2.5 trillion over the first 10 years. Even if we go with the government's lower estimates, the cost is already on the rise. A new estimate by the Congressional Budget Office puts the cost of the Senate bill at $875 billion over 10 years, $4 billion more than its original projection. Imagine how fast costs would soar if one of the bills became public policy.

7. Real cost controls are nowhere to be found! The Democrats are offering no meaningful tort reform that will help push down the high malpractice insurance premiums that are a burden to doctors and their patients. Nor are they considering any other cost-saving provisions, such as allowing the sale of individual health plans across state lines or easing health insurance mandates.

8. Insurance premiums will rise, not fall! One goal of nationalizing health care is to lower costs, to bend the spending curve downward. Yet, as Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin acknowledged Wednesday, that won't be the case.
"Anyone who would stand before you and say, 'Well, if you pass health care reform, next year's health care premiums are going down,' I don't think is telling the truth," he said from the Senate floor. "I think it is likely they would go up."
An analysis completed by the CBO at the request of Sen. Evan Bayh confirms Durbin's suspicions. Insurance coverage in the individual market will "be about 10% to 13% higher in 2016 than the average premium for nongroup coverage in that same year under current law," it concluded.

9. Medicare is already bankrupting us! The Medicare trust fund, which has unfunded obligations of $37.8 trillion, will be insolvent in 2017. How can lawmakers justify another entitlement that will cost trillions when they can't pay for existing liabilities?

10. There aren't enough doctors now! Last month, 26% of physicians responding to a Web poll on Sermo.com, which calls itself "the largest online physician community," said they had been forced to close, or were considering closing, their solo practices. Providing coverage for an additional 31 million Americans when the number of doctors is shrinking won't improve our health care.

11. The doctor-patient relationship will be wrecked! The latest IBD/TIPP Poll, taken just last week, found that Americans, by a wide 48%-26% margin, believe the doctor-patient relationship will decline if the Democrats' plan is passed.

12. Medical care will also deteriorate! IBD/TIPP has also found that 51% of Americans believe care would get worse under government control. Only 10.5% said they felt it would improve. In our doctor poll, 72% disagreed with administration claims that the government could cover 47 million more people with better-quality care at lower cost.

13. Rationing of care is inevitable! Health care is not an unlimited resource and must be rationed, either by the individual, providers or government. In Britain and Canada, where the government does the rationing, medical treatment waiting lists are sometimes deadly and quite often excessively long.
For instance, late cancer diagnoses in an overcrowded public health care system cause up to 10,000 needless deaths a year in Britain. The reasons cited for the late diagnoses include doctor delay, delay in primary care, system delay and delay in secondary care.

14. Private health insurers will be destroyed! Added mandates and price controls will force many insurers to simply get out of the health plan business because it will no longer be profitable.

15. It's probably unconstitutional! One way to help bring down the number of uninsured is to demand that those without coverage buy health plans. But the government has never passed a law requiring Americans to buy any good or service. Constitutional scholars say any such mandate would likely draw a legal challenge.
__________________

CrackerJax said:

Let's just cut to the chase....

Here is a compilation.....


Why Health Bill Makes No Sense

Posted 03/12/2010 07:12 PM ET (IBD)


1. The people don't want it! - Correct! they want more done, like a public option.

2. Doctors don't want it! - The poll you mention here was bullshit! Even the slightest of research reveals it was a mail in questionairre with horrible wording and no details on methodology. The same jokesters who took this poll also thought McCain had the young vote 74-22! I hope you don't actually consider this type of push polling in your 'cut to the chase', Mr. I AM reason. Laughable http://blog.beliefnet.com/cityofbrass/2009/09/do-doctors-support-health-care.htmlhttp://blog.beliefnet.com/cityofbrass/2009/09/do-doctors-support-health-care.html

3. Half the Congress doesn't want it! No shit, Sherlock


4. People are happy with the health care they've got! No shit! People are happy to be insured! What a revelation! Another shocker: Medicare recipients report greater saisfaction with the coverage they receive than young folks on private plans... http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/In-the-Literature/2009/May/Meeting-Enrollees-Needs.aspx

5. It doesn't even cover the people they set out to cover! This is exactly why people don't much like the current bill, IT DOES NOT DO ENOUGH! We want all people covered and we want a public option.

6. Costs will go up, not down! Not according to the CBO...And if you really want costs to go up, just keep fighting for doing nothing. Becuase you know what? If we do nothing we will surely see premiums double very, very quickly (10-20 years or so)

7. Real cost controls are nowhere to be found! This point called for TORT reform and crossing state lines, that familiar right wing chant that will somehow save healthcare. Obama has offered TORT reform for fuck sake. It will help, but it is not a fix all. Neither is crossing state lines. We all know this by now.

8. Insurance premiums will rise, not fall! Not if there is a mandate for all to buy insurance or pay a fine. That is the concept of insurance, the bigger the pool, the better.

9. Medicare is already bankrupting us! No shit. They cover the oldest, sickest folks in the land. How about we do something to cut adminitrative costs to the levels of other countries?

10. There aren't enough doctors now! There are other avenues to getting healthy other than doctors. If everyone could have access to a triage nurse, many issues could be resolved without a doctor visit.

11. The doctor-patient relationship will be wrecked! Well, if a majority of American believe it (or in this case only 48%), then it MUST be true. Did the same idiots from bullet point 2 make this poll?

12. Medical care will also deteriorate! Again, if more people believe it then don't, it MUST be true. That must also explain why all those countries with universal health care have higher life expectancies and lower infant mortalities while paying less.

13. Rationing of care is inevitable! Hmmmm, waits for procedures in these other countries are usually on par with the waits I encountered through Cigna or Kaiser. Sometimes they are much less, like in Japan or Taiwan for example. No rationing, better health stats, and they pay way less. Damn those socialists!

14. Private health insurers will be destroyed! Bullshit! Take a look at Germany, or Switzerland, or a number of other countries. Competition does not go away once the profit motive is removed. A public option in other arenas has not killed private competitors (fedex/ups vs. usps, private universities vs. public universities, etc)

15. It's probably unconstitutional! Maybe, but I'd rather pay a 2% fine and have a system that works than stick with this current mess of ours.__________________

Click to expand...

I took the liberty of editing your article.

Dragline said:

OK, tell me this. How is tort reform and buying over state lines going to help a middle class person who has a history of cancer and was dropped by their previous insurance company? No amount of tort reform or buying over state lines is going to do anything for someone who insurance companies DO NOT WANT because they are too big of a risk. Even if they do get insurance, how sustainable do you think a 4 figure per month insurance premium is for a middle class person?

Don't get me wrong. I am a big believer in tort reform and believe it should have been part of this reform along with a public option! As for buying over state lines, that is just a very weak talking point. For starters, most of the big insurance companies are available over state lines. Most of these companies simply have a subsidiary available to those states which follow those state guidelines. Also just because there may be over a thousand insurance companies doesn't mean it isn't the same few mega insurers flipping the bill. You may buy your insurance from Joe BlahBlah Insurance, Inc in Cleveland Ohio. But with so much capital needed to run these programs, there is a good chance they are simply a reseller for a Blue Cross or UHC type insurer.
Not to mention those who preach "states rights" are now wanting the federal government to override the states own insurance standards.

Click to expand...

dukeofbaja said:

Wow, and to think I was giving you credit as being somewhat informed and non-partisan. This statement blows both of those theories....

I am for TORT reform, but it will not fix shit by itself and it will not bend the long term cost curve. And crossing state lines? What, so the insurance companies could cherrypick the healthiest folks in each state?

How about doing what every other rich capitalist democracy does, ie bar insurers from making profits, force them to accept everyone, a mandate for all citizens to get insurance or pay a fine, and negotiating on an annual basis the costs for certain procedures.

Click to expand...

It appears I stepped on a nerve.

Riddle me this, if Tort Reform is a good idea, as you both seem to believe; why is it not included in the bill being considered? Conceivably, it could be worth a Republican vote or two. In truth, we all know why it is not under consideration. Democrap pandering to a special interest group with deep pockets. A particularly heinous, blood-sucking, special interest group: Trial lawyers.

I wish the Interstate Commerce Clause applied to health insurance, too. Sue me.

dukeofbaja said:

I took the liberty of editing your article.

Click to expand...

You edited, but had no intelligent answers. That article is 100% accurate and researched.

So you know how to copy and paste too?

CrackerJax said:

You edited, but had no intelligent answers. That article is 100% accurate and researched.

Click to expand...

Back to bullet point 2. You don't have to do much research to find out it is 100% bullshit.


There's an alarmist poll out from Investors Business Daily that makes the shocking claim that almost half (46%) of America's doctors will quit under Obama's proposed health care reform plan. The implications of such a finding - which runs counter to the American Medical Association's own support of President Obama for reform - are that one result of reform would be that America's doctors would revolt. But does this poll make any sense?
It turns out that the poll was a mail-in questionaire, not the usual phone-based poll. This is important because of selection bias; doctors who are predisposed to feeling threatened by proposed health care legislation will be more likely to respond. Also, mail-in responses tend to be skewed towards older repsondents, who also are more likely to be skeptical, or at least more willing to retire.
The poll itself was terribly written; one of the questions read, "Do you believe the government can cover 47 million more people and it will cost less and the quality of care will be better?" which is really three questions, and heavily biased towards skepticism (indeed, 71% answered No). It's worth noting that the pollling outfit has a horrendous track record; polling demigod Nate Silver comments:
Nate also notes that the poll hasn't released any details of methodology, and bizarrely also says "responses are still coming in." Responses are still coming in? Why would they release any results until all responses have come in? The percentages are utterly meaningless otherwise! Nate advises people to ignore the poll entirely; it's going to be taken up by right-wing idealogues of course, but that was its intended audience from the beginning.

Johnnyorganic said:

It appears I stepped on a nerve.

Riddle me this, if Tort Reform is a good idea, as you both seem to believe; why is it not included in the bill being considered? Conceivably, it could be worth a Republican vote or two. In truth, we all know why it is not under consideration. Democrap pandering to a special interest group with deep pockets. A particularly heinous, blood-sucking, special interest group: Trial lawyers.

I wish the Interstate Commerce Clause applied to health insurance, too. Sue me.

Click to expand...

Wow, imagine that, corrupt politicians. That they exist on both sides of the aisle is old news.

And again, with respect to point 2 (Doctors don't want it)....is that why the AMA supports health care reform?

http://www.savagepacer.com/news/opinions/community-voices-let-s-get-health-care-reform-done-103

Or is it that you live in a bubble?

dukeofbaja said:

Wow, imagine that, corrupt politicians. That they exist on both sides of the aisle is old news.

Click to expand...

If you intend to lecture greedy Conservatives from your high horse, that's no attitude to take.

dukeofbaja said:

Back to bullet point 2. You don't have to do much research to find out it is 100% bullshit.


There's an alarmist poll out from Investors Business Daily that makes the shocking claim that almost half (46%) of America's doctors will quit under Obama's proposed health care reform plan. The implications of such a finding - which runs counter to the American Medical Association's own support of President Obama for reform - are that one result of reform would be that America's doctors would revolt. But does this poll make any sense?
It turns out that the poll was a mail-in questionaire, not the usual phone-based poll. This is important because of selection bias; doctors who are predisposed to feeling threatened by proposed health care legislation will be more likely to respond. Also, mail-in responses tend to be skewed towards older repsondents, who also are more likely to be skeptical, or at least more willing to retire.
The poll itself was terribly written; one of the questions read, "Do you believe the government can cover 47 million more people and it will cost less and the quality of care will be better?" which is really three questions, and heavily biased towards skepticism (indeed, 71% answered No). It's worth noting that the pollling outfit has a horrendous track record; polling demigod Nate Silver comments:

As we learned during the [Presidential] campaign -- when, among other things, they had John McCain winning the youth vote 74-22 -- the IBD/TIPP polling operation has literally no idea what they're doing. I mean, literally none. For example, I don't trust IBD/TIPP to have competently selected anything resembling a random panel, which is harder to do than you'd think.
​

Nate also notes that the poll hasn't released any details of methodology, and bizarrely also says "responses are still coming in." Responses are still coming in? Why would they release any results until all responses have come in? The percentages are utterly meaningless otherwise! Nate advises people to ignore the poll entirely; it's going to be taken up by right-wing idealogues of course, but that was its intended audience from the beginning.

Click to expand...

Still unable to talk about the problems with health care.... I'm not surprised.

CrackerJax said:

Still unable to talk about the problems with health care.... I'm not surprised.

Click to expand...

Do you have no memory? Let me bring you up to speed....

You: Here is something I copied and pasted showing health care is bad!
Me: There are many glaring problems with that bullshit
You: It's 100% researched and accurate!
Me: No, it's not. Here is just one example that is indisputably bullshit
You: You're still unable to talk about the problems health care.

Seriously, did you get lost? Do you have dimentia? No fucking clue what is going on? Let me make it clear: I showed that your '100% researched and accurate' list of talking points are anything but 100% accurate. They are, in layman's terms, bullshit!

So do you still think your talking points are 100% researched and accurate? Are you that deluded?

Johnnyorganic said:

If you intend to lecture greedy Conservatives from your high horse, that's no attitude to take.

Click to expand...

When did I bring up greedy conservatives? I rail against idiocy and greed in both parties and I find anyone who is excessively partisan to be a laughable joke of a human being. See my very first post in this thread.

Maybe you have other ideas other than TORT reform and crossing state lines. I should hope you do, based on the intelligence you seem to display in other posts. But to suggest that these two things alone will fix our health care mess is silly. And that is about all I have heard proposed by overly partisan right winger types.

Do you need him to answer that?

dukeofbaja said:

When did I bring up greedy conservatives? I rail against idiocy and greed in both parties and I find anyone who is excessively partisan to be a laughable joke of a human being. See my very first post in this thread.

Maybe you have other ideas other than TORT reform and crossing state lines. I should hope you do, based on the intelligence you seem to display in other posts. But to suggest that these two things alone will fix our health care mess is silly. And that is about all I have heard proposed by overly partisan right winger types.

Click to expand...

Well, Duke. I should hope that you do know that I have other ideas.

Like the notion that health care/health insurance is not a function of the Federal government.

Yes, I do believe you've mentioned that before

You guys must be smoking some ditch weed.
Forget about the Left/Right paradigm. See beyond the bullshit. Divide and conquer is the tactic they're using. If they keep us arguing amongst each other, we will never change anything. When people are ready to see past their own ego's and come together to make a difference, then we will see real change.

Until then, they will have you stuck in a never ending loop. Repeating the same mistakes that have been made throughout history and making you have a false sense of freedom, when you're really tax paying slaves of the bankers.

Replace the negativity with positivity.

[youtube]UtcMtq9q4BE[/youtube]