Your government health insurance will not be worth the paper its written on

kcwolf

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 1, 2000
7,224
21
0
Iowa City
DTB

Your point is well taken, I am not for deadbeats taking advantage of the situatuion. They alone could ruin healthcare.

I didn't mention it, but was talking about people who switch jobs.

Something needs to be done. We are discriminating against people who switch jobs with preexisting conditions, those who lose jobs that are of no fault of there own, and sick people dropped from health coverage.

As far as the doctors, I could care less if you beleive me. It would take me a little time, but I could list all their names and contact info. I am being treated at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics in Iowa City, Iowa - a teaching hospital with approx. 8,000 employees. This area is known for progressive thinkers.

Something also needs to be done as health care is truely hurting our economy. As to the particulars of reform, that will be vigorisly debated by all. It is safe to say their will always be dissatisfaction in anything put forth.

Personally, I would like to see something bi-partisan that drives down the GDP. I'm more worried about economic reform than everyone being insured - unless we can separate ligimate from illegals.

Is it possible for republicans to look at it from an economic and discrimination points of view. Or are they more interested in signing bills with no means of paying for it, and never offering a solution now or when they had control of congress.

This death panel business, nazi stuff, & other extremes over the years by both parties is getting a little old. Give me the old days, before 1984, when my health insurance was provided by a non-profit company: Blue Cross and Blue Shield.
 

Duff Miver

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 29, 2009
6,521
55
0
Right behind you
to all of the liberal genius here..... what happens after gov run healthcare takes in all of the illegals that will be granted amnesty ?

yes, it will happen if the healthcare crap is pushed through. 40 mil new hispanics should be enough to get ocomma re-elected.

welfare state on the way. :moon:

What happens to them now? They get care through emergency rooms, and YOU pay for it.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,424
128
63
Bowling Green Ky
DTB

Your point is well taken, I am not for deadbeats taking advantage of the situatuion. They alone could ruin healthcare.

I didn't mention it, but was talking about people who switch jobs.

Something needs to be done. We are discriminating against people who switch jobs with preexisting conditions, those who lose jobs that are of no fault of there own, and sick people dropped from health coverage.

As far as the doctors, I could care less if you beleive me. It would take me a little time, but I could list all their names and contact info. I am being treated at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics in Iowa City, Iowa - a teaching hospital with approx. 8,000 employees. This area is known for progressive thinkers.

Something also needs to be done as health care is truely hurting our economy. As to the particulars of reform, that will be vigorisly debated by all. It is safe to say their will always be dissatisfaction in anything put forth.

Personally, I would like to see something bi-partisan that drives down the GDP. I'm more worried about economic reform than everyone being insured - unless we can separate ligimate from illegals.

Is it possible for republicans to look at it from an economic and discrimination points of view. Or are they more interested in signing bills with no means of paying for it, and never offering a solution now or when they had control of congress.

This death panel business, nazi stuff, & other extremes over the years by both parties is getting a little old. Give me the old days, before 1984, when my health insurance was provided by a non-profit company: Blue Cross and Blue Shield.

You have some valid points KC--
but a little clarification on pre ex.
If a person changes jobs and ins co -pre ex conditions are waived. The only way they would have pre conditions with next carrier is if the went without coverage for 63 days.
When a person leaves a carrier they will issue a letter of credible coverage for this purpose.

Problems do arise however if a person would leave group coverage and go to indiviual coverage (other than cobra). While the individual coverage would have to cover the pre ex "if" they excepted person--however they could turn them down and not cover them at all.
This is my pet peave.

It is probably area I run into most that needs to be fixed. Most states have pool for people that are defined as not insurable but premiums are high.

I would be in favor of a national pool for high risk people--but would have some waiting period on pre ex conditions if they did not have coverage previously. If not you have group of people abusing system--taking it out before medical procedure then dropping till time.

I'd like to know who the 45 million they speak of are. I know many are illegals but assume bulk just don't want to pay for coverage.

We have--
-medicaid that pays for the indigent.
-schip O just increased it to pay for children with families whos incomes are 300% above poverty level($62,000 for family of 4)

--were does the tax payor draw the line on who they are going to pack on their backs:shrug:
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,493
256
83
Victory Lane
You have some valid points KC--
but a little clarification on pre ex.
If a person changes jobs and ins co -pre ex conditions are waived. The only way they would have pre conditions with next carrier is if the went without coverage for 63 days.
When a person leaves a carrier they will issue a letter of credible coverage for this purpose.

Problems do arise however if a person would leave group coverage and go to indiviual coverage (other than cobra). While the individual coverage would have to cover the pre ex "if" they excepted person--however they could turn them down and not cover them at all.
This is my pet peave.

It is probably area I run into most that needs to be fixed. Most states have pool for people that are defined as not insurable but premiums are high.

I would be in favor of a national pool for high risk people--but would have some waiting period on pre ex conditions if they did not have coverage previously. If not you have group of people abusing system--taking it out before medical procedure then dropping till time.

I'd like to know who the 45 million they speak of are. I know many are illegals but assume bulk just don't want to pay for coverage.

We have--
-medicaid that pays for the indigent.
-schip O just increased it to pay for children with families whos incomes are 300% above poverty level($62,000 for family of 4)

--were does the tax payor draw the line on who they are going to pack on their backs:shrug:

.............................................

DTB

your Gumby dammit

we all know what you mean

eddieMGumby.jpg
 
Last edited:

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,493
256
83
Victory Lane
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VU28Pv26nNQ&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VU28Pv26nNQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,493
256
83
Victory Lane
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/n-dpUuk77qk&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/n-dpUuk77qk&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Its really quite ironic when the tables are so easily turned and the sun shines on DTB Gumby dammit
 
Last edited:

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,493
256
83
Victory Lane
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/K9u5wBMpcY0&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/K9u5wBMpcY0&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
..........................................................

Hey Gumby , notice how Carly is clueless that her questions would offend anyone or that race would even be a issue.
 
Last edited:

Wilson

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,426
10
0
1813 Virginia St
dr. freeze;2381523]Consider the following:

Most every physician who can, will retire.

Good, too many of them are crooks who have been stealing from gov programs for years.
Nurses can perform the same service in clinics for half the cost. Doctors hate that shit.


Physicians who work their tails off will cut back on # of patients seen.

Yeh they will play golf two days during the week and not just every wednesday. Their case loads wont change and you know it

Fewer of our best and brightest and hardest workers will go into medicine as success is penalized and headaches dealing with government bureaucrats in order to deliver care just is not very attractive.
The ones that are in it for the money and not to help people will quit medicine or not go in it to start with. That will be a good thing. Oh wait they cant do that , where would they get their kickbacks from drug companies for selling certain pills. And overcharging for services at every turn.

At the same time, the populace is getting older and we are going to add 47 million plus all the other illegal aliens not yet here?

alot of people uninsured are younger and in good health. The money taken in when they start paying will help even things out.

Good luck getting that appointment unless you are willing to pay $$$$$$$$$ or you have a great connection.

Scare tactics from a neocon. :142smilie
There will not be a problem getting the same appointments we have always had. If you want quciker service then pay. That seems fair.


You have cancer eating up your face? Maybe Obama will take your call if you donate 25 bucks to his next "Yes we can" speech.:mj07: :mj07:
so you a doctor supposedly and wish cancer as a joke on the public. your a classy guy.
you should be the first to resign and leave medical care to others

Scott-

You are a POS socialist. All the talent and hard work shouldn't be rewarded? Government should regulate their income as they provide national health care?

Get in line for your cheese and your vaccine.

Its fawking bullshit. Regulate the insurance crooks...don't penalize the doctor.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,493
256
83
Victory Lane
Scott-

You are a POS socialist. All the talent and hard work shouldn't be rewarded? Government should regulate their income as they provide national health care?

Get in line for your cheese and your vaccine.

Its fawking bullshit. Regulate the insurance crooks...don't penalize the doctor.
...............................................................

Wilson

your a POS neocon conservative.

You must not have been reading how the doctors are being prosecuted for stealing millions from medicare and taking their bribes from the drug companies.

I notice you didnt comment on that.

They are not all on the take, but enough of them are so that it has to be reformed.

They have responsibility. They dont like that word.

I am not a socialist, I am a human being
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,493
256
83
Victory Lane
Dean wants Obama to stand by public option
Former DNC chair among liberals upset over apparent health care shift

Dean: We will have a public option
Aug. 17: Former DNC Chairman Howard Dean explains why he believes a public option is likely be included in the health bill during the reconciliation process between the House and Senate.
Morning Joe


ET, Mon., Aug 17, 2009
WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama's weekend concession on a health care "government option" drew complaints from liberals and scarce interest from Republicans and other critics on Monday, a fresh sign of the challenge in finding middle ground in an increasingly partisan U.S. political struggle.

The White House insisted there had been no shift in position, adding the president still favors a federal option for the sale of health insurance. "The bottom line is this: Nothing has changed," said a memo containing suggested answers for administration allies to use if asked about the issue.

But some supporters of health care overhaul sounded less than reassured.

"You really can't do health reform" without allowing the government to compete with private insurers, said Howard Dean, a former Democratic Party chairman. "Let's not say we're doing health reform without a public option," he added in a slap at the administration's latest move.

Dean, a leading figure among the party's liberals, urged the administration to stand by statements made early on in the debate in which it steadfastly insisted that such a public option was indispensable to genuine change. Dean said Medicare and the Veterans Administration are "two very good programs that have been around for a long time."

Dean appeared on morning news shows Monday amid increasing indications the Obama White House is retreating from the public option in the face of vocal opposition from Republicans and some vocal participants at a town-hall-style meetings around the country.

The former Vermont governor was asked on NBC's "TODAY" show about President Barack Obama's statement over the weekend that the public option for insurance coverage was "just a sliver" of the overall proposal. Obama's health and human services secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, advanced that line, telling CNN Sunday that a direct government role in a system intended to provide virtually universal coverage was "not the essential element."

Dean, a physician, argued that a public option is fair and said there must be such a choice in any genuine shake up of the existing system.

"You can't really do health reform without it," he said. Dean maintained that the health insurance industry has "put enormous pressure on patients and doctors" in recent years.

He called a direct government role "the entirety of health care reform. It isn't the entirety of insurance reform ... We shouldn't spend $60 billion a year subsidizing the insurance industry."

His remarks were echoed by lawmakers as well as a top labor union official, John Sweeney, who said the option was the only way to force "real competition" on the insurance industry.

The United States is the only developed nation that does not have a comprehensive national health care plan for all its citizens. About 47 million of America's 300 million population are without health insurance.

'Just one sliver'
Obama and his top aides signaled retreat over the weekend on proposals for a provision under which consumers could choose from health insurance policies sold by the federal government as well as those marketed by private companies. "All I'm saying is, though, that the public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform," the president told a town hall-style audience in Colorado on Saturday. "This is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it."


Q&A on health care co-ops
The Obama administration has signaled that it might accept health care cooperatives instead of a government-run health insurance program to compete with private insurers.

Obama ?confident? of health care overhaul


The government option has emerged as one of the most contentious elements of legislation taking shape in Congress, with critics saying it is a step toward a federal takeover of health care and supporters arguing it is essential to create competition with private firms that provide health insurance.

Proposals for creation of nonprofit cooperative ventures have emerged as an alternative, but so far, neither liberals nor conservatives have shown great interest.

Obama made his remarks as he struggled to regain momentum for a health care overhaul that has generated controversy among Democrats and near unanimous opposition among Republicans. Recent polls show a lessening of support, and the administration and its allies were thrown on the defensive earlier this month when angry protesters turned up at widely publicized town hall events held by Democratic lawmakers.

60 votes needed in Senate
The bill faces numerous obstacles when lawmakers return to the capital in early September.

In the House, where Democrats hold a 256-178 majority, passage of legislation will hinge on the ability of the administration and Democratic leaders to satisfy liberals who favor a robust government option and centrists who prefer the co-op approach.

Because they cannot realistically count on any Republican votes, the margin for error is reduced. At the same time, House leaders want to protect their rank-and-file centrists, who tend to come from districts that swing between Democrats and Republicans in elections. The centrists' victories in 2006 and 2008 helped give the party its large majority.

In a statement, the leader of the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, said, "There is strong support in the House for a public option," adding it is the best way "to lower costs, improve the quality of health care, ensure choice and expand coverage."

But the statement did not rule out legislation that lacks a government option.

There are similar Democratic divisions in the Senate, where the party controls 60 seats to 40 for the Republicans. A bipartisan group of six senators has been meeting for weeks on a possible compromise that would not include a government option. It is not clear whether they will be successful in reaching a final agreement.

While the president says he favors a bipartisan approach, he has also said it may ultimately be necessary for Democrats to produce a bill more to their own liking.

Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, said the lawmaker "supports a public option" because it could keep insurance companies in check. "But he also knows that 60 votes will be needed to get anything done. Senator Reid recognizes there are different proposals on the table that could accomplish this goal," the spokesman said, a clear reference to the co-op alternative.

The cooperatives envisioned by some backers would be nonprofit, member-owned groups that would assemble networks of health care providers and negotiate payment rates with them. The government would provide up to $6 billion to get them started.

The history of health care co-ops in the U.S. is uneven. Many have failed because they were unable to compete effectively, or because tensions between doctors and consumer-oriented governing boards could not be resolved. But some, including one in Washington state, have operated successfully
............................................................

:0corn :0corn
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top