Preference on healthcare reform issue

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

our health care quality is a million times better than Canadians.. why do you think Canadians who can afford it come to America to get it?

Why do you think Americans can't afford their prescription meds and go to Canada to purchase them?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

hey idiot.. she knows that. You for some reason make it sound like its "free" when these benefits are as expensive as our houses.. or more.

Hey idiot. No, I've never said or acted like they were free. Here's what I said: those that live in this country and thus have the freedom to diss the various government agencies as terrible, useless, etc., and think these agencies should be done away with, should try living without them.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Sorry, your assumption is wrong. I don't think anybody who thinks differently than I do is stupid.

And yes, when certain posters here - the same ones, over and over - can't seem to keep to debating subject, and start instead snarking at and insulting the posters, rather than the content, it is what it is. Sorry you don't like to see it named.

Some here can't stand the Dems, or Obama, and anybody who posts opposite to what they believe is snarked at or insulted, sworn at, etc. It's all some on this board can come up with.

Yeah, that behaviour isn't as "dense" as mistyping "too"

Pot meet kettle

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Why do you think Americans can't afford their prescription meds and go to Canada to purchase them?

health care quality = cost of meds? really?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Pot meet kettle

You're right up front there, pal.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

health care quality = cost of meds? really?

We could talk about all the elderly having operations in Mexico, because they can't afford healthcare in the US.

I stopped into a grocery pharmacy to buy some drugs for a friends sick barn cat today. Amoxicillin liquid $4. Amoxicillin-clavalunic acid (Pfizer's Augmentin in human terms, better for patient, been around forever, not much more expensive than amoxi in the animal healthcare arm of Pfizer drugs) was $40.

That's outrageous theft, pure and simple. To give one drug away with one hand, while behind the back with the other hand grabbing far more than both drugs together are worth.

Oh, yes, and that was the "professional discount" price, discounted off the price the client would have had to pay ($46) if the uninsured client purchased it herself.

Yes, I'd like an evil world of socialized medicine, where everyone pays $8 for Amoxi, and $12 for Augmentin.

Palin Crossed Border For Canadian Health Care
First Posted: 03- 8-10 11:59 AM | Updated: 03- 8-10 12:26 PM

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin -- who has gone to great lengths to hype the supposed dangers of a big government takeover of American health care -- admitted over the weekend that she used to get her treatment in Canada's single-payer system.

"We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada," Palin said in her first Canadian appearance since stepping down as governor of Alaska. "And I think now, isn't that ironic?"

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

We could talk about all the elderly having operations in Mexico, because they can't afford healthcare in the US.

I stopped into a grocery pharmacy to buy some drugs for a friends sick barn cat today. Amoxicillin liquid $4. Amoxicillin-clavalunic acid (Pfizer's Augmentin in human terms, better for patient, been around forever, not much more expensive than amoxi in the animal healthcare arm of Pfizer drugs) was $40.

That's outrageous theft, pure and simple. To give one drug away with one hand, while behind the back with the other hand grabbing far more than both drugs together are worth.

Oh, yes, and that was the "professional discount" price, discounted off the price the client would have had to pay ($46) if the uninsured client purchased it herself.

Yes, I'd like an evil world of socialized medicine, where everyone pays $8 for Amoxi, and $12 for Augmentin.

You are comparing the quality of medical care and the consumer cost of meds?

[docicu3]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You are comparing the quality of medical care and the consumer cost of meds?

It's a spectrum of cost, some virtually nil. GIANT pharmacy gives away both Augmentin and Amox for some time now but the cost of meds otherwise in this country is much more complex than this.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

Sorry, your assumption is wrong. I don't think anybody who thinks differently than I do is stupid.

And yes, when certain posters here - the same ones, over and over - can't seem to keep to debating subject, and start instead snarking at and insulting the posters, rather than the content, it is what it is. Sorry you don't like to see it named.

Some here can't stand the Dems, or Obama, and anybody who posts opposite to what they believe is snarked at or insulted, sworn at, etc. It's all some on this board can come up with.

Yeah, that behaviour isn't as "dense" as mistyping "too"

so your post calling people dense and ignorant is justified, whereas theirs are not? sorry, riot. if you go back and look, you may see that where you may have felt tired of the debate, you did exactly the same thing.


edit~i just went to the start of the thread, and read thru-and guess who was the first to tossing out those names.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You are comparing the quality of medical care and the consumer cost of meds?

The quality of medical care and the cost of meds are completely interwoven. People who are on hundreds of dollars of meds per month, but cannot take them because they cannot afford to purchase them in the US (even with insurance, Medicare, etc), directly results in poor health care. When they have to leave this country to afford their medical care (their regular drugs) that's a sad, sad state of affairs.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

so your post calling people dense and ignorant is justified, whereas theirs are not? sorry, riot. if you go back and look, you may see that where you may have felt tired of the debate, you did exactly the same thing.


edit~i just went to the start of the thread, and read thru-and guess who was the first to tossing out those names.

Really? Like where you said what I posted was sanctimonious crap?

Sorry, 'Zig - right back at you.

[AeWingnut]

http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi...t-whats-in-it/

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by AeWingnut

http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi...t-whats-in-it/

The headline was: Nancy Pelosi: We Need to Pass Health Care Bill to Find Out What’s In It

Unbelievable. These liberals must be the product of their own failed education system in the public schools...those of them who didn't start out with a silver spoon in their mouth, admittedly few.

This is right up there with Obama's quote during the campaign about "Our individual prosperity depends upon our collective prosperity."

Both quotes are "bass-ackwards", using the clean version to avoid swearing.

Obviously, a bill that is not understandable EVEN BY LEGISLATORS should not be passed. This is an amplification of the fact that a bill that is not understandable in the colloquial language of the people should not be passed.

And to Obama: "Collective prosperity" refers to a collection of what? Individuals. So obviously individuals have to prosper before any "collective" can. That is aside from the fact that all of our rights are based on the individual, and that a conceptual problem with groups of individuals is that they can be defined many ways. "Everybody" or "Legal Citizens vs. Illegals" or "Caucasians vs. Non-Caucasians" or "Residents of New Jersey", whatever. Advertising professionals, statisticians, actuaries and insurance companies do this all the time. But we should not make policy based on arbitrarily defined groups at the expense of individuals.

The Democrats' lack of intellectual fortitude does not mix well with their condescension and contempt for those actually paying the bills.

[Danzig]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/10/bu...nhardt.html?hp


Health Care’s Obstacle: No Will to Cut
By DAVID LEONHARDT
Published: March 9, 2010

For anyone who cares about medical costs — which is to say anyone who cares about the take-home pay of American families or about the budget deficit — President Obama’s health reform plan is a terribly mixed bag.

It does so much less than the ideal plan would do. It would not come close to eliminating Medicare’s long-term budget deficit. It would reduce that deficit only if a future Congress did not tinker with the various taxes and spending cuts scheduled to be phased in over the next decade.

On the other hand, the plan would make progress in all sorts of areas. Insurance exchanges would create more competition. A Medicare oversight board would gain authority over reimbursement rates. Hospitals that committed certain medical errors — harmful, costly errors — would face financial penalties.

So which matters more: what the plan does, or what it fails to do? It’s a tough call, and the answer depends on what you see as the alternative to the current plan.




So I agree that health reform should do more to reduce spiraling medical costs. But saying so doesn’t qualify as hard-headed fiscal realism. In fact, it’s the easy thing to say. The bigger issue is how policy makers can achieve the goal, given the political realities.

Fortunately, they still have an opportunity to do better.


---obama has tried his all or nothing for nine months-perhaps they should work more on getting it right then getting it passed.

[Riot]

[quote=joeydb]The headline was: Nancy Pelosi: We Need to Pass Health Care Bill to Find Out What’s In It

Unbelievable. These liberals must be the product of their own failed education system in the public schools...those of them who didn't start out with a silver spoon in their mouth, admittedly few.

Take a deep breath, Joey. It doesn't mean what you say, above.

It just means the obvious - that we won't know exactly what's in the final bill, until it's gone through all the reconciliation between House and Senate. There is still push for a public option in the House, etc.

It doesn't mean the House and Senate bills are "not understandable".

[Riot]

Fortunately, they still have an opportunity to do better.

---obama has tried his all or nothing for nine months-perhaps they should work more on getting it right then getting it passed.

Nobody is starting from scratch at this point. They will get it passed. About time. And hopefully it will contain the more "liberal" (and cost-cutting) stuff such as the public option versus only exchanges (the stuff that will cut our budget by billions over the next 10 years).

If not, the House has already said that no matter what comes out of reconciliation, they will start amending the law to booster it up and provide what's needed. The GOP had said they are running this fall on repealing it. Good luck with that.

Polls do show that people don't like "healthcare reform" - until it is explained what it encompasses (no death panels, no 'government-run' healthcare), then the polls show that acceptance rises alot.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...ealth-car.html

And Newsweek:

Posted Tuesday, March 09, 2010 3:41 PM
Gallup Poll Shows Reasons People Oppose Health Care Reform
Katie Connolly

One number in this new Gallup poll on health-care reform caught my eye, because, oddly, it has good news for both sides of the debate. Gallup asked the 48% of people who oppose health care reform about why they're against the Democrats' plans. The most popular reason, cited by 20% of people, was a concern that the plan would raise premium prices or end up costing them more. That's good news for Republicans. It means their talking points are getting through. The notion that the cost of health insurance would rise was repeated by several Republicans at the recent White House summit. When Gallup asked the same question last September, only 9% of people were most worried about their costs going up. Score one for the Republican message machine. (Interestingly, only 2% of people were worried about abortions being covered. I guess that line of attack isn't sticking.)

But this nugget is also good news for Democrats. Why? Because the CBO declared, after rigorous analysis of the Senate bill, that premium prices would actually go down by 7-10%. That means that if Obama ends up signing the legislation into law, the same health-care plan you have now will be cheaper. (Ezra Klein notes though that prices will go up for some people who don't get insurance through their place of work, but that's largely because subsidies will help them buy more expensive, comprehensive plans not necessarily because they are forced to pay more out of pocket.)

So, if health care actually passes, and people don't see their premiums rise, a significant portion of residual anger at Democrats could very well subside. So Dems win too.

Especially this fall.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

Nobody is starting from scratch at this point. They will get it passed. About time. And hopefully it will contain the more "liberal" (and cost-cutting) stuff such as the public option versus only exchanges (the stuff that will cut our budget by billions over the next 10 years).

If not, the House has already said that no matter what comes out of reconciliation, they will start amending the law to booster it up and provide what's needed. The GOP had said they are running this fall on repealing it. Good luck with that.

Polls do show that people don't like "healthcare reform" - until it is explained what it encompasses (no death panels, no 'government-run' healthcare), then the polls show that acceptance rises alot.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...ealth-car.html

And Newsweek:



Especially this fall.

who said start over from scratch? i still think obama should have listened more to rahm emanual, and taken small steps, a change here, a change there-with the end result being a good overall reformation. but no one believes that the govt can A-do it better than private, and B-save money. we have economists on one hand saying a growing deficit will kill our economy, and on the other we have the CBO already saying that obama's current budget plan has our deficit growing by leaps and bounds.

you'd think tho, in the nine months of battling, someone could have changed these numbers of doubters even a little, but that hasn't happened. and people might still approve more of obama, but they don't approve at all of congress, which is why this is all floundering.

[Riot]

but no one believes that the govt can A-do it better than private, and B-save money.

A - The government isn't replacing private health care, they are regulating it. There is no single payer, although that does have some support.

BTW, I believe in and strongly support single payer at this point. So yes, there are quite a few that believe the government can do it better. Medicare and Medicaid is a godsend to millions.

The worse people in the world to be in charge of healthcare are those that don't have any financial interest in paying for healthcare to sick people, who only make money by not paying for healthcare for people - and that would be private insurance companies. That is why we are in such an awful state for healthcare in this country.

and on the other we have the CBO already saying that obama's current budget plan has our deficit growing by leaps and bounds.

B - The CBO has said that the House plan would save billions over 10 years, cut tons from our deficit. Are you talking about the Senate bill unamended?

someone could have changed these numbers of doubters even a little, but that hasn't happened.

It has, and I just posted stories regarding polls that show it has.

I agree, people don't approve of Congress.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Riot

A - The government isn't replacing private health care, they are regulating it. There is no single payer, although that does have some support.

BTW, I believe in and strongly support single payer at this point. So yes, there are quite a few that believe the government can do it better. Congress.

The only people who believe the government can do anything better than the private sector are people who live with their heads in the sand. or politicians. I'm sure they feel they know best and are as arrogant as you.

I think they broke the mold with you Riot.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

The only people who believe the government can do anything better than the private sector are people who live with their heads in the sand. or politicians. I'm sure they feel they know best and are as arrogant as you.

I think they broke the mold with you Riot.

Yes, I am the one calling people names here. Not our 'moderators'.