100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: The Arrogance Of The US Congress | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
You know Crick, the more I look at what you have posted, the more confused I get. You talk about how "Congress needs to get the lobbyist out of their back pockets and come up wilh a plan that legislates, regulates, and reforms private health care as it now exists." Doesn't John Stossel OPPOSE government regulation in a fashion or form? He's Libertarian after all. Free market? Then you go on to say "Some think even need deregulating to encourage more competition." No this is sending mixed signals. Confusing. Sounds like somthing the Insuarnce carriers would want and anything to cause delays and "Kill the Bill". You also state "There is a multitude of ideas that can be legislated to protect people." Not quite out of the Libertarian playbook either, is it? I think alot of people are seeing the insurance industry behind this kill the bill thing, and we aren't falling for that either. The insurance companies have had years to reform and avoid this altogether and they chose money over real care for those they supposedly represent. While at the same time lobbying our leaders to take their side. If they wanted to fix this they alone could go a long way to help, but instead they would rather stop this. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know Crick, the more I look at what you have posted, the more confused I get. You talk about how "Congress needs to get the lobbyist out of their back pockets and come up wilh a plan that legislates, regulates, and reforms private health care as it now exists." Doesn't John Stossel OPPOSE government regulation in a fashion or form? He's Libertarian after all. Free market? Then you go on to say "Some think even need deregulating to encourage more competition." No this is sending mixed signals. Confusing. Sounds like somthing the Insuarnce carriers would want and anything to cause delays and "Kill the Bill". You also state "There is a multitude of ideas that can be legislated to protect people." Not quite out of the Libertarian playbook either, is it? Who said I was a die hard libertarian. What you are trying to suggest is that if I post an article by a libertarian and I don't completely agree 100% with their platform somehow it diminishes MY ARGUMENTS against government operated health insurance. My answer to that is any fool should be able to look back at some of these government programs and see how much of a failure they are. Many should be able to agree with Stossel on that. You just can't argue with this: "Also leave aside the inevitable huge cost of any such program. The administration estimates $1.5 trillion over 10 years with no increase in the deficit. But no one should take that seriously. When it comes to projecting future costs, these guys may as well be reading chicken entrails. In 1965, hospitalization coverage under Medicare was projected to cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual price tag was $66 billion (http://tinyurl.com/ltmezh)." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know Crick, the more I look at what you have posted, the more confused I get. You talk about how "Congress needs to get the lobbyist out of their back pockets and come up wilh a plan that legislates, regulates, and reforms private health care as it now exists." Doesn't John Stossel OPPOSE government regulation in a fashion or form? He's Libertarian after all. Free market? Then you go on to say "Some think even need deregulating to encourage more competition." No this is sending mixed signals. Confusing. Sounds like somthing the Insuarnce carriers would want and anything to cause delays and "Kill the Bill". You also state "There is a multitude of ideas that can be legislated to protect people." Not quite out of the Libertarian playbook either, is it? I think alot of people are seeing the insurance industry behind this kill the bill thing, and we aren't falling for that either. The insurance companies have had years to reform and avoid this altogether and they chose money over real care for those they supposedly represent. While at the same time lobbying our leaders to take their side. If they wanted to fix this they alone could go a long way to help, but instead they would rather stop this. In order to compete, privater insurers first will find a way to drop all their poor risk onto the government run program. The government will not run the program on a level playing field whereas private industry can make enough profit to raise capital. More and more people will choose the government option to save. Private insurers will eventually go bankrupt. Taxpayers will be stuck with another program that constantly drives the deficit up. That is what has the insurance carriers scared. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is this the same John Stossel that wants to legalize child porn, assisted suicide, prostitution and repeal the ban on DDT?? 
see how easy it is to turn it from a discussion of the points in the article to a discussion of the author's moral character? clever I am not attacking John Stossel's moral character. The point I was trying to make is that John is a Libertarian and believes that government should not be involved in anything. You have to understand where the author is coming from and he is from the fringe. I believe this country is moving in a different direction than what John Stossel thinks should happen. Change is needed, the current system is broke. Change is coming. "agreed to disagree," Say hello to the quadrillion......deficit=millions/billions/trillions/quadrillions So what is it going to cost ME if we do NOT reform health care? Now, I am stating this from my own personal experience, I'm not going to copy/paste some article as many of the posts are. In the past 6 years, my medical premium has doubled. That's a 100% increase from what it was just 6 short years ago. If this trend continues, in 2015 (6 years), it will have cost me an extra $21,000 out of MY POCKET!! This is part of the problem that the President keeps stating over and over but nobody is listening. He also uses a more conservative estimate that premiums will double in 10 years. Based on my experience and in the plan I am currently with and the demographics of the group, we are trending much higher. Our preiums are projected to double in the next 6 years again. I would also qualify to say that I am talking medical premiums only. No including co-pays but Includes Rx. Aloha 
No one is arguing that reform isn't necessary. The argument is whether or not the government can efficiently run a health care program alongside private industry on a level playing field and run one that will be paid for by not adding to the deficit and one that will not cause exodus from private plans leading to a single payee government plan where cost greatly exceed what is taken in. And one that doesn't erode choices. I don't think government can. The articles I post point to specific instances of government blunder that shows me that when government gets involved taxpayers lose. Congress has not tried to fix private insurance yet. I believe that Congress needs to get the lobbyist out of their back pockets and come up wilh a plan that legislates, regulates, and reforms private health care as it now exists. Some thing even need deregulating to encourage more competition. Why not allow small busineses to join together to get the same rates that larger corporations get. There is a multitude of ideas out there that will bring cost down. There is a multitude of ideas that can be legislated to protect people. Maybe the government should have played a little poker with this one - by holding the threat of a government plan to obtain concessions from private health insurance providers and drug companies. So you don't think government can efficiently run a health care program? I think that's exactly what the insurance companies are afraid of. Doctors too. Look at what happens under Medicare; the Government sets the rates of how much they are going to pay for example, an office visit. Regardless of what the doctor normaly charges patients, that is all he is going to get from Medicare. Insurance companies do the same thing. They negotiate rates with a network of doctors and set what they are going to pay. an excample would be that a Specialist I am seeing charges $150 for an office visit normally. My BCBS plan negotiated a rate of $62 per visit so that's all he gets. The Insurance carriers vary on the discounts they recieve from Physician networks, hospitals and Rx. Some get better discounts than others and it can add up to quite a bit. They even vary on the way the negotiate the contracts as some carriers for example with hospitals, base it on the type of occurance vs. number of days stay. what has all the Insurance carriers scared is that a Public Option Plan that is being proposed, will be setting rates very low, similar to what they see with Medicare. They will have to compete. The Rx Industry has already said they will be offering huge discounts to a Public Option plan. The jumped on the bandwagon early as they wanted to be involved in shaping the legislation. You can bet there are many specialists in the industry drafting this legislation. It is not being written by a bunch of morons at the capitol as Mr. Stossel has suggested. I would also add, just something to ponder: What if the Federal Government did away with Medicare and turned it all over to be completely run by Private Insurers? What would it cost per year? "Also leave aside the inevitable huge cost of any such program. The administration estimates $1.5 trillion over 10 years with no increase in the deficit. But no one should take that seriously. When it comes to projecting future costs, these guys may as well be reading chicken entrails. In 1965, hospitalization coverage under Medicare was projected to cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual price tag was $66 billion (http://tinyurl.com/ltmezh)." The above is exactly what happens time and time again with our government. Check out Amtrak too. The Post Office struggles. I totally disagree with you. Here is what will happen. In order to compete, privater insurers first will find a way to drop all their poor risk onto the government run program. The government will not run the program on a level playing field whereas private industry can make enough profit to raise capital. More and more people will choose the government option to save. Private insurers will eventually go bankrupt. Taxpayers will be stuck with another program that constantly drives the deficit up. That is what has the insurance carriers scared. Why it is the big insurance companies are so weak in the knees about a public option health care plan? After all, you and these companies say they the Government can not run any thing well, and complain Government costs more than the private sector. So what should they fear? Well, there is a new report out which sheds some light on this. In a nut shell, the Health Care Insurance companies are concerned about protecting their near monopolies. The way these companies are going at this is by controlling major portions of a local market, at the State level. The Department of Justice considers a market “highly concentrated” if one company holds 42% of market share. They are concerned about their profits, bottom line, corporate greed. The President knows this and so does the Congress. The health care lobbies stopped reform once, but they won't this time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is this the same John Stossel that wants to legalize child porn, assisted suicide, prostitution and repeal the ban on DDT??
see how easy it is to turn it from a discussion of the points in the article to a discussion of the author's moral character? clever I am not attacking John Stossel's moral character. The point I was trying to make is that John is a Libertarian and believes that government should not be involved in anything. You have to understand where the author is coming from and he is from the fringe. I believe this country is moving in a different direction than what John Stossel thinks should happen. Change is needed, the current system is broke. Change is coming. "agreed to disagree," Say hello to the quadrillion......deficit=millions/billions/trillions/quadrillions So what is it going to cost ME if we do NOT reform health care? Now, I am stating this from my own personal experience, I'm not going to copy/paste some article as many of the posts are. In the past 6 years, my medical premium has doubled. That's a 100% increase from what it was just 6 short years ago. If this trend continues, in 2015 (6 years), it will have cost me an extra $21,000 out of MY POCKET!! This is part of the problem that the President keeps stating over and over but nobody is listening. He also uses a more conservative estimate that premiums will double in 10 years. Based on my experience and in the plan I am currently with and the demographics of the group, we are trending much higher. Our preiums are projected to double in the next 6 years again. I would also qualify to say that I am talking medical premiums only. No including co-pays but Includes Rx. Aloha
No one is arguing that reform isn't necessary. The argument is whether or not the government can efficiently run a health care program alongside private industry on a level playing field and run one that will be paid for by not adding to the deficit and one that will not cause exodus from private plans leading to a single payee government plan where cost greatly exceed what is taken in. And one that doesn't erode choices. I don't think government can. The articles I post point to specific instances of government blunder that shows me that when government gets involved taxpayers lose. Congress has not tried to fix private insurance yet. I believe that Congress needs to get the lobbyist out of their back pockets and come up wilh a plan that legislates, regulates, and reforms private health care as it now exists. Some thing even need deregulating to encourage more competition. Why not allow small busineses to join together to get the same rates that larger corporations get. There is a multitude of ideas out there that will bring cost down. There is a multitude of ideas that can be legislated to protect people. Maybe the government should have played a little poker with this one - by holding the threat of a government plan to obtain concessions from private health insurance providers and drug companies. So you don't think government can efficiently run a health care program? I think that's exactly what the insurance companies are afraid of. Doctors too. Look at what happens under Medicare; the Government sets the rates of how much they are going to pay for example, an office visit. Regardless of what the doctor normaly charges patients, that is all he is going to get from Medicare. Insurance companies do the same thing. They negotiate rates with a network of doctors and set what they are going to pay. an excample would be that a Specialist I am seeing charges $150 for an office visit normally. My BCBS plan negotiated a rate of $62 per visit so that's all he gets. The Insurance carriers vary on the discounts they recieve from Physician networks, hospitals and Rx. Some get better discounts than others and it can add up to quite a bit. They even vary on the way the negotiate the contracts as some carriers for example with hospitals, base it on the type of occurance vs. number of days stay. what has all the Insurance carriers scared is that a Public Option Plan that is being proposed, will be setting rates very low, similar to what they see with Medicare. They will have to compete. The Rx Industry has already said they will be offering huge discounts to a Public Option plan. The jumped on the bandwagon early as they wanted to be involved in shaping the legislation. You can bet there are many specialists in the industry drafting this legislation. It is not being written by a bunch of morons at the capitol as Mr. Stossel has suggested. I would also add, just something to ponder: What if the Federal Government did away with Medicare and turned it all over to be completely run by Private Insurers? What would it cost per year? "Also leave aside the inevitable huge cost of any such program. The administration estimates $1.5 trillion over 10 years with no increase in the deficit. But no one should take that seriously. When it comes to projecting future costs, these guys may as well be reading chicken entrails. In 1965, hospitalization coverage under Medicare was projected to cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual price tag was $66 billion (http://tinyurl.com/ltmezh)." The above is exactly what happens time and time again with our government. Check out Amtrak too. The Post Office struggles. I totally disagree with you. Here is what will happen. In order to compete, privater insurers first will find a way to drop all their poor risk onto the government run program. The government will not run the program on a level playing field whereas private industry can make enough profit to raise capital. More and more people will choose the government option to save. Private insurers will eventually go bankrupt. Taxpayers will be stuck with another program that constantly drives the deficit up. That is what has the insurance carriers scared. Why it is the big insurance companies are so weak in the knees about a public option health care plan? After all, you and these companies say they the Government can not run any thing well, and complain Government costs more than the private sector. So what should they fear? Well, there is a new report out which sheds some light on this. In a nut shell, the Health Care Insurance companies are concerned about protecting their near monopolies. The way these companies are going at this is by controlling major portions of a local market, at the State level. The Department of Justice considers a market “highly concentrated” if one company holds 42% of market share. They are concerned about their profits, bottom line, corporate greed. The President knows this and so does the Congress. The health care lobbies stopped reform once, but they won't this time. Ask Ford in a couple of years...... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Unknow
on
Fri 07/31/09 05:46 AM
|
|
You know Crick, the more I look at what you have posted, the more confused I get. You talk about how "Congress needs to get the lobbyist out of their back pockets and come up wilh a plan that legislates, regulates, and reforms private health care as it now exists." Doesn't John Stossel OPPOSE government regulation in a fashion or form? He's Libertarian after all. Free market? Then you go on to say "Some think even need deregulating to encourage more competition." No this is sending mixed signals. Confusing. Sounds like somthing the Insuarnce carriers would want and anything to cause delays and "Kill the Bill". You also state "There is a multitude of ideas that can be legislated to protect people." Not quite out of the Libertarian playbook either, is it? I think alot of people are seeing the insurance industry behind this kill the bill thing, and we aren't falling for that either. The insurance companies have had years to reform and avoid this altogether and they chose money over real care for those they supposedly represent. While at the same time lobbying our leaders to take their side. If they wanted to fix this they alone could go a long way to help, but instead they would rather stop this. In order to compete, privater insurers first will find a way to drop all their poor risk onto the government run program. The government will not run the program on a level playing field whereas private industry can make enough profit to raise capital. More and more people will choose the government option to save. Private insurers will eventually go bankrupt. Taxpayers will be stuck with another program that constantly drives the deficit up. That is what has the insurance carriers scared. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
crickstergo
on
Fri 07/31/09 06:55 AM
|
|
You know Crick, the more I look at what you have posted, the more confused I get. You talk about how "Congress needs to get the lobbyist out of their back pockets and come up wilh a plan that legislates, regulates, and reforms private health care as it now exists." Doesn't John Stossel OPPOSE government regulation in a fashion or form? He's Libertarian after all. Free market? Then you go on to say "Some think even need deregulating to encourage more competition." No this is sending mixed signals. Confusing. Sounds like somthing the Insuarnce carriers would want and anything to cause delays and "Kill the Bill". You also state "There is a multitude of ideas that can be legislated to protect people." Not quite out of the Libertarian playbook either, is it? I think alot of people are seeing the insurance industry behind this kill the bill thing, and we aren't falling for that either. The insurance companies have had years to reform and avoid this altogether and they chose money over real care for those they supposedly represent. While at the same time lobbying our leaders to take their side. If they wanted to fix this they alone could go a long way to help, but instead they would rather stop this. In order to compete, privater insurers first will find a way to drop all their poor risk onto the government run program. The government will not run the program on a level playing field whereas private industry can make enough profit to raise capital. More and more people will choose the government option to save. Private insurers will eventually go bankrupt. Taxpayers will be stuck with another program that constantly drives the deficit up. That is what has the insurance carriers scared. Didn't you just make my argument clearer. Without profits private industries go BANKRUPT. Yeah, they are worried about profits.....the government isn't worried about profits - otherweise, there would be no deficit.....If the government was better at running thing why is the national debt so large???? The following graph shows how the National Debt has grown year by year since 1940 in actual dollar amounts, uncorrected for inflation: 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
1956deluxe
on
Fri 07/31/09 10:22 AM
|
|
Crick, you hit you head right on the nail! The national debt is out of control which is exactly why we need Health Care Reform NOW!
P.S. - Is Virginia Foxx your representative by any chance? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Unknow
on
Fri 07/31/09 11:46 AM
|
|
You know Crick, the more I look at what you have posted, the more confused I get. You talk about how "Congress needs to get the lobbyist out of their back pockets and come up wilh a plan that legislates, regulates, and reforms private health care as it now exists." Doesn't John Stossel OPPOSE government regulation in a fashion or form? He's Libertarian after all. Free market? Then you go on to say "Some think even need deregulating to encourage more competition." No this is sending mixed signals. Confusing. Sounds like somthing the Insuarnce carriers would want and anything to cause delays and "Kill the Bill". You also state "There is a multitude of ideas that can be legislated to protect people." Not quite out of the Libertarian playbook either, is it? I think alot of people are seeing the insurance industry behind this kill the bill thing, and we aren't falling for that either. The insurance companies have had years to reform and avoid this altogether and they chose money over real care for those they supposedly represent. While at the same time lobbying our leaders to take their side. If they wanted to fix this they alone could go a long way to help, but instead they would rather stop this. In order to compete, privater insurers first will find a way to drop all their poor risk onto the government run program. The government will not run the program on a level playing field whereas private industry can make enough profit to raise capital. More and more people will choose the government option to save. Private insurers will eventually go bankrupt. Taxpayers will be stuck with another program that constantly drives the deficit up. That is what has the insurance carriers scared. Didn't you just make my argument clearer. Without profits private industries go BANKRUPT. Yeah, they are worried about profits.....the government isn't worried about profits - otherweise, there would be no deficit.....If the government was better at running thing why is the national debt so large???? The following graph shows how the National Debt has grown year by year since 1940 in actual dollar amounts, uncorrected for inflation:
WE ALL KNOW THE DEMS ARE NOT......But again I never heard them "CLAIM" to be either or run their political platform on that principle. Hypocrisy at its best!!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stossel... I like some of his reports, the stuff he did for reason has been pretty good.
However, I'll never forget that he got his behind in a WWF locker room and hit Dr. D Dave Schultz with the "Isn't it fake" question. Dr. D dropped him with an open handed slap... then did it again! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 How To Write Your Reptilian Congress Person
Many people believe that some of our highest political offices, here and abroad, are controlled by a race of interdimensional aliens. Reptilians, as they are called by those in the know, can shape shift into human form to dupe the voting masses. These aliens are not the same as the Greys who travel in UFOs. If you believe your congress person is a Reptilian, and you have an issue you would like to bring to his or her attention, here are some tips for writing an effective letter. Step 1 Introduce yourself in a way that shows you and your family are sympathetic to reptiles. Mention that your son is studying to be a herpetologist, that your daughter volunteers at the reptile zoo, or that you are morally opposed to snake skin accessories. Step 2 Describe the issue you are supporting/opposing and include several concrete examples of how this will be an improvement/detriment to your community. The more detailed and thorough your letter, the more convincing it will be. Step 3 Don't type in all caps or use vulgar language. Check your spelling and punctuation carefully. Step 4 Don't include clip art of outer space, UFOs, or aliens with big eyes. Reptilians come from another dimension, and the Greys (big-eyed aliens)are a race of aliens controlled by the Reptilians. To indicate that you believe otherwise will make you come off as ignorant. Don't include dried insects either; for security reasons your congress person cannot eat any food that comes through the mail. Step 5 Sign and date you letter and put it in an envelope with the correct address and postage. Congratulate yourself for participating in democracy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stossel... I like some of his reports, the stuff he did for reason has been pretty good. However, I'll never forget that he got his behind in a WWF locker room and hit Dr. D Dave Schultz with the "Isn't it fake" question. Dr. D dropped him with an open handed slap... then did it again! I remember that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crick, you hit you head right on the nail! The national debt is out of control which is exactly why we need Health Care Reform NOW!
P.S. - Is Virginia Foxx your representative by any chance? Yeah, Reform but not the government running a program that will add to the deficit like so many in past have. Where did my graph disappear too??? All one has to do is look at the actual national debt caused by the same belief as yours..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're pretty cool Crickstergo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Unknow
on
Fri 07/31/09 11:52 AM
|
|
Crick, you hit you head right on the nail! The national debt is out of control which is exactly why we need Health Care Reform NOW!
P.S. - Is Virginia Foxx your representative by any chance? Yeah, Reform but not the government running a program that will add to the deficit like so many in past have. Where did my graph disappear too??? All one has to do is look at the actual national debt caused by the same belief as yours.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're pretty cool Crickstergo
Thanks. Back At You Mirror
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The opposite of what - that our government has been running programs that for far too long show government programs only add to the defict. Who said republicans administrations didn't add to the debt???
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Unknow
on
Fri 07/31/09 12:58 PM
|
|
The opposite of what - that our government has been running programs that for far too long show government programs only add to the defict. Who said republicans administrations didn't add to the debt??? What I find funny is the guy(No names) who refuses to pay $125 month for healthcare thru his job...HE!! they take out more than that in one week for mine and people pay more than that for medicare!!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know Crick, the more I look at what you have posted, the more confused I get. You talk about how "Congress needs to get the lobbyist out of their back pockets and come up wilh a plan that legislates, regulates, and reforms private health care as it now exists." Doesn't John Stossel OPPOSE government regulation in a fashion or form? He's Libertarian after all. Free market? Then you go on to say "Some think even need deregulating to encourage more competition." No this is sending mixed signals. Confusing. Sounds like somthing the Insuarnce carriers would want and anything to cause delays and "Kill the Bill". You also state "There is a multitude of ideas that can be legislated to protect people." Not quite out of the Libertarian playbook either, is it? I think alot of people are seeing the insurance industry behind this kill the bill thing, and we aren't falling for that either. The insurance companies have had years to reform and avoid this altogether and they chose money over real care for those they supposedly represent. While at the same time lobbying our leaders to take their side. If they wanted to fix this they alone could go a long way to help, but instead they would rather stop this. In order to compete, privater insurers first will find a way to drop all their poor risk onto the government run program. The government will not run the program on a level playing field whereas private industry can make enough profit to raise capital. More and more people will choose the government option to save. Private insurers will eventually go bankrupt. Taxpayers will be stuck with another program that constantly drives the deficit up. That is what has the insurance carriers scared. Actually they have been dropping their poor risk for years, they didn't need a government receptical for that, just no compassion. And if you don't care much for compassion, then how about their greed? Don't care about that? It absolutely cracks me up that the insurers might have to compete with the government now, when they could have avoided this a long time ago. I am old enough that I won't have to deal with our earthly drama much longer, but it amazes me how well the insurers have people snowed, and the american people are helping them to accomplish their snow job. One can only hope that people really aren't as apethetic as accused and investigate those that are against this. I imagine there might be a few respectable insurers out there, but from the stories I hear not enough. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The claim that 'insurers' are attempting to stop the bill...
Is the other side of the propaganda coin. I am not an insurer. I can however add... and because of the results I absolutely oppose THIS bill. It is a fleecing on a grand scale. That I can not accept. Fix what we can... Work on what can't be fixed. But stop trying to feed me poop and tell me its caviar. |
|
|
|
|
