Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Healthcare reform (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33019)

Riot 11-29-2009 05:53 PM

Healthcare reform
 
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29959.html

dellinger63 11-29-2009 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot

LMAO. From MIT's website.

During the 2008 he was a consultant to the Clinton, Edwards and Obama Presidential campaigns.

http://econ-www.mit.edu/faculty/gruberj/shortbio

Keep the blinks on!

Riot 11-29-2009 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63
LMAO. From MIT's website.

During the 2008 he was a consultant to the Clinton, Edwards and Obama Presidential campaigns.

http://econ-www.mit.edu/faculty/gruberj/shortbio

Keep the blinks on!

Sure, and the GOP is going all out to show how cost effective any healthcare reform whatsoever could be, right? And the GOP focus is on what their constituents want, first, right? You should see the completely ignorant letters Mitch McConnell's office is sending out in response to our letters to his office on this issue. His head is completely up his pompous azz.

Danzig 11-29-2009 10:49 PM

i wonder if the economist also ran a report on what it'll cost the govt- in other words, taxpayers.

SOREHOOF 11-30-2009 05:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig
i wonder if the economist also ran a report on what it'll cost the govt- in other words, taxpayers.

That is beside the point.

Danzig 11-30-2009 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF
That is beside the point.


yeah, sure it is. the quicker people start realizing that nothing the govt 'gives' them is free, the better off many would be. it would also help if the guv would come to the realization they can't continue to spend more than they take in.

dellinger63 11-30-2009 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot
Sure, and the GOP is going all out to show how cost effective any healthcare reform whatsoever could be, right? And the GOP focus is on what their constituents want, first, right? You should see the completely ignorant letters Mitch McConnell's office is sending out in response to our letters to his office on this issue. His head is completely up his pompous azz.

Healthcare reform is NOT cost effective period. And Gov healthcare will be a nightmare. Unless of course you love waiting in lines, paying more taxes, burdening small businesses or know a 'guy' in the system.

Riot 11-30-2009 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig
i wonder if the economist also ran a report on what it'll cost the govt- in other words, taxpayers.

If you read the thread I posted, yes, that is included.

Edit: whoops, wrong article. Here you go: http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/health.cfm

Riot 11-30-2009 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63
Healthcare reform is NOT cost effective period. And Gov healthcare will be a nightmare. Unless of course you love waiting in lines, paying more taxes, burdening small businesses or know a 'guy' in the system.

So you didn't read the figures in the thread, either?

SOREHOOF 11-30-2009 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig
yeah, sure it is. the quicker people start realizing that nothing the govt 'gives' them is free, the better off many would be. it would also help if the guv would come to the realization they can't continue to spend more than they take in.

Since only about 45% (+or -) pay any income taxes at all in this country, I think there are a lot of people who do in fact believe that the Govt. gives away "free" things. As this number continues to rise there will be less and less opposition to increased Govt. spending, and less opposition to increased taxes on the ones left paying taxes. The "rich" already pay more than their fair share. Where is it going to come from? The Govt. is notorious for underestimating how much their pet programs will cost.

Riot 11-30-2009 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63
Healthcare reform is NOT cost effective period. And Gov healthcare will be a nightmare. Unless of course you love waiting in lines, paying more taxes, burdening small businesses or know a 'guy' in the system.

Maybe for you.

As for me, I'll be keeping my own current (becoming less expensive) insurance, and my own current doctors, hospitals. No lines for me. No need to "know" anyone in the system.

No change for me, except less expensive and my insurance company won't be able to exclude pre-existing conditions on me or suddenly rescind my insurance just because I make a claim.

My taxes won't go up to cover it as the bill won't be signed into law on that basis.

My friends with small businesses will be able to finally afford reasonably-priced health insurance for their employees. Geesh, that used to cost me alot of money, for few employees, when I had my own business.

Can't wait, too bad it won't happen for a couple years (unless states go ahead and implement their choice to start things early)

Cannon Shell 11-30-2009 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot
Sure, and the GOP is going all out to show how cost effective any healthcare reform whatsoever could be, right? And the GOP focus is on what their constituents want, first, right? You should see the completely ignorant letters Mitch McConnell's office is sending out in response to our letters to his office on this issue. His head is completely up his pompous azz.

C'mon. if this guy worked for Bush 1 and 2 and wrote the reform policy was awful you would do everything imaginable to discredit him.


From the article

And people with low incomes would receive premium tax credits that would reduce the price that they pay for health insurance by as much as $2,500 to $7,500.

People with low incomes will receive tax credits that save them up to $7500? Just what is considered low income these days?
How can this possibly happen?

SOREHOOF 11-30-2009 03:03 PM

The increased taxes will start immediatly. The program won't start for a few years. How would you like to buy a car and have the dealer tell you that you can pick it up in 3 years, after you've been making the payments? Meanwhile other people have been driving it.

Riot 11-30-2009 03:04 PM

Quote:

C'mon. if this guy worked for Bush 1 and 2 and wrote the reform policy was awful you would do everything imaginable to discredit him.
That's a big assumption.

Quote:

From the article

And people with low incomes would receive premium tax credits that would reduce the price that they pay for health insurance by as much as $2,500 to $7,500.

People with low incomes will receive tax credits that save them up to $7500? Just what is considered low income these days?
How can this possibly happen?
It's explained in the bill.

Cannon Shell 11-30-2009 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF
The increased taxes will start immediatly. The program won't start for a few years. How would you like to buy a car and have the dealer tell you that you can pick it up in 3 years, after you've been making the payments? Meanwhile other people have been driving it.

And in 8 years after all the surplus built up from 4 years of revenue with no output is long gone, hello massive increases in taxes.

Riot 11-30-2009 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF
The increased taxes will start immediatly. The program won't start for a few years. How would you like to buy a car and have the dealer tell you that you can pick it up in 3 years, after you've been making the payments? Meanwhile other people have been driving it.

You are assuming there will be increased taxes. Not a bad assumption when looking at government programs, I agree.

But I'll wait to see if it holds true that the CBO says this will not require tax increases to pay for it, and if Obama holds true when he said he wouldn't sign it into law if taxes had to be increased to pay for it.

SOREHOOF 11-30-2009 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot
You are assuming there will be increased taxes. Not a bad assumption when looking at government programs, I agree.

But I'll wait to see if it holds true that the CBO says this will not require tax increases to pay for it, and if Obama holds true when he said he wouldn't sign it into law if taxes had to be increased to pay for it.

You are assuming there won't be?

Cannon Shell 11-30-2009 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot
That's a big assumption.



It's explained in the bill.

Give me a break on the assumption. 1-20 would be long odds.

I may not go to MIT or be a math wiz but have a hard time figuring out how a lower income person could save $7500 per year in tax incentives. Just how much do lower income people PAY in taxes?

Not to mention that much of lower income America doesnt even pay taxes...

Cannon Shell 11-30-2009 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot
You are assuming there will be increased taxes. Not a bad assumption when looking at government programs, I agree.

But I'll wait to see if it holds true that the CBO says this will not require tax increases to pay for it, and if Obama holds true when he said he wouldn't sign it into law if taxes had to be increased to pay for it.

Let me in a little secret...
















politicians lie







especially when it is going to cost us more money

Danzig 11-30-2009 03:12 PM

not only do they not pay, they get earned income credit at years' end. a 'refund' for taxes not paid. one hell of a system..

Cannon Shell 11-30-2009 03:17 PM

A massive liberal healthcare program rigged to soak the people who are already getting soaked with other tax increases and we are supposed to believe that it will pay for itself and will actually help reduce the deficit?

Why not guarantee cancer being cured too while they are at it?

Riot 11-30-2009 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF
You are assuming there won't be?

I am assuming:

Quote:

Riot wrote:

You are assuming there will be increased taxes. Not a bad assumption when looking at government programs, I agree.

But I'll wait to see if it holds true that the CBO says this will not require tax increases to pay for it, and if Obama holds true when he said he wouldn't sign it into law if taxes had to be increased to pay for it.

Riot 11-30-2009 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
A massive liberal healthcare program rigged to soak the people who are already getting soaked with other tax increases and we are supposed to believe that it will pay for itself and will actually help reduce the deficit?

Why not guarantee cancer being cured too while they are at it?

There are currently alot of cancers that are cureable.

Riot 11-30-2009 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

politicians lie

Gee, ya think? :D We all know that, we just lived through Bush-Cheney.

Cannon Shell 11-30-2009 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot
Gee, ya think? :D We all know that, we just lived through Bush-Cheney.

Obama is even better than them. He lies and makes you believe it. Well he makes YOU believe it

SOREHOOF 11-30-2009 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot
There are currently alot of cancers that are cureable.

Only if detected in time. The time someone spends on a waiting list, or waiting for beaurocratic permission for the tests could be a matter of life or death. These people don't give 2 sh!ts about anyones health. It's a power grab plain and simple. Congressmen (and women) are not lining up to sign on to the Public Option. They wouldn't even vote to make it mandatory for themselves to be on the P.O.

Riot 11-30-2009 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
Obama is even better than them. He lies and makes you believe it. Well he makes YOU believe it

Yes, we'll see. You can say, "I told you so" ;)

Riot 11-30-2009 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF
Only if detected in time..

No. All "cancers" are not alike. "In time" is in reference to those types of cancers that are highly (and quickly) malignant. Yes, those are nasty. There are plenty that are not, however.

There are many cancers today that are completely and rather easily curable. People still "hear the C word" and freak out. That's unfortunate, and needlessly scary for them. That's a lack of education about what oncology can do nowadays.

SOREHOOF 11-30-2009 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot
No. All "cancers" are not alike. "In time" is in reference to those types of cancers that are highly (and quickly) malignant. Yes, those are nasty. There are plenty that are not, however.

There are many cancers today that are completely and rather easily curable. People still "hear the C word" and freak out. That's unfortunate, and needlessly scary for them. That's a lack of education about what oncology can do nowadays.

I stand corrected Dr. Riot.

Antitrust32 11-30-2009 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
Give me a break on the assumption. 1-20 would be long odds.

I may not go to MIT or be a math wiz but have a hard time figuring out how a lower income person could save $7500 per year in tax incentives. Just how much do lower income people PAY in taxes?

Not to mention that much of lower income America doesnt even pay taxes...

I consider myself Low income and still pay more than 7500 in taxes. Though some of that of course is the ridiculous Social Security that I have to pay so freaking much of and will never see a freaking dime. No IM not BITTER or anything.

SOREHOOF 11-30-2009 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32
I consider myself Low income and still pay more than 7500 in taxes. Though some of that of course is the ridiculous Social Security that I have to pay so freaking much of and will never see a freaking dime. No IM not BITTER or anything.

Yet another Govt. program going broke.

Riot 11-30-2009 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF
I stand corrected Dr. Riot.

I am a Dr. Riot, but we vets certainly treat alot of cancers. We use the same chemotherapeutic and radiation therapies as humans do, and there is alot of crossover and shared information between human and animal cancers.

Even in countries with real socialized medicine (the US is not by any means close with any of the healthcare reform bills pending), stories about long waits for treatment revolve mainly along elective, non-life-threatening lines. Horror stories are rare.

Far rarer than here in the US, where you have to have a certain income level to get "the best" care, where having a serious cancer can readily bankrupt your family when the insurance company decides not to pay or stops paying, and where early diagnosis of many diseases is often missed because many people simply cannot afford to see a doctor on a regular, preventive or timely basis.

That is WHY there is such a massive push for healthcare reform in this country. Because we NEED it!

SOREHOOF 11-30-2009 05:26 PM

I agree we need reform. I don't want to see a massive Govt. takeover. I forgot you were really a doctor. I was being a smartas

Riot 11-30-2009 05:34 PM

:rolleyes:
Quote:

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF
I agree we need reform. I don't want to see a massive Govt. takeover.

Ditto.

You're not a smartazz:) Glenny Beck - there's a smartazz :tro:

witchdoctor 11-30-2009 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot
Even in countries with real socialized medicine (the US is not by any means close with any of the healthcare reform bills pending), stories about long waits for treatment revolve mainly along elective, non-life-threatening lines. Horror stories are rare.

Obviously, you have never worked at a VA Hospital or had to deal with the Indian Health service.:zz:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:14 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.