National Health Care Debate

[Syd]

Two points:

1. The Federalist Papers have no bearing upon modern law.

2. Adam's definitions of "property rights" are open to interpretation.

3. He thought the Alien & Sedition Act was a good thing as well

[conman823]

Two points:

1. The Federalist Papers have no bearing upon modern law.

2. Adam's definitions of "property rights" are open to interpretation.

When I came back to this thread and saw "The Federalist Papers" were referenced I knew it has become derailed, or turned into and American History term paper.

[Serpico1103]

When I came back to this thread and saw "The Federalist Papers" were referenced I knew it has become derailed, or turned into and American History term paper.

From my experience, once someone cites the Federalist papers, the discussion is over.

It makes me feel like I am being pulled into a debate over the meaning of some clause in the Bible.

Blah.

[SonOfSmeagol]

A lot of talk out there about how the ins companies are out of control and taking advantage of the people and need to be reigned in etc etc. Wondering what this talk really means. As an example, Pelosi says: "I'm very pleased that (Democratic leaders) will be talking, too, about the immoral profits being made by the insurance industry and how those profits have increased in the Bush years." …she also welcomed the attention being drawn to insurers' "obscene profits."

FACT CHECK: Health insurer profits not so fat (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iorq8FSpX_4LX_UG_xHQIjJY3SvgD9BI5VB00)

“Health insurance profit margins typically run about 6 percent, give or take a point or two. That's anemic compared with other forms of insurance and a broad array of industries, even some beleaguered ones.”

“The industry's overall profits grew only 8.8 percent from 2003 to 2008, and its margins year to year, from 2005 forward, never cracked 8 percent.”

[Syd]

eh what a surprise, all of America becomes more poor and the lecherous health insurance industry's profits only grow a modest amount?

[HBox]

A lot of talk out there about how the ins companies are out of control and taking advantage of the people and need to be reigned in etc etc. Wondering what this talk really means. As an example, Pelosi says: "I'm very pleased that (Democratic leaders) will be talking, too, about the immoral profits being made by the insurance industry and how those profits have increased in the Bush years." …she also welcomed the attention being drawn to insurers' "obscene profits."

FACT CHECK: Health insurer profits not so fat (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iorq8FSpX_4LX_UG_xHQIjJY3SvgD9BI5VB00)

“Health insurance profit margins typically run about 6 percent, give or take a point or two. That's anemic compared with other forms of insurance and a broad array of industries, even some beleaguered ones.”

“The industry's overall profits grew only 8.8 percent from 2003 to 2008, and its margins year to year, from 2005 forward, never cracked 8 percent.”

Hyperbole from politicians aside, I think what bothers people most about insurance companies is not how much profit they are making but how they are doing it. If they were doing a good job of covering people, being honest in covering claims and holding down I don't think their profits would be a problem. But they aren't doing any of those things.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

A lot of talk out there about how the ins companies are out of control and taking advantage of the people and need to be reigned in etc etc. Wondering what this talk really means. As an example, Pelosi says: "I'm very pleased that (Democratic leaders) will be talking, too, about the immoral profits being made by the insurance industry and how those profits have increased in the Bush years." …she also welcomed the attention being drawn to insurers' "obscene profits."

FACT CHECK: Health insurer profits not so fat (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iorq8FSpX_4LX_UG_xHQIjJY3SvgD9BI5VB00)

“Health insurance profit margins typically run about 6 percent, give or take a point or two. That's anemic compared with other forms of insurance and a broad array of industries, even some beleaguered ones.”

“The industry's overall profits grew only 8.8 percent from 2003 to 2008, and its margins year to year, from 2005 forward, never cracked 8 percent.”

Its the same drivel as the oil companies profits. Sure Exxon Mobil made a ton of money but their profit margins were not enough to call them windfalls, Plus XOM employs close to 80,000 people. They paid billions in taxes however Pelosi loves to grandstand, doesnt she realize that salaries need to be approved by the board of directors/shareholders?

[Syd]

Hyperbole from politicians aside, I think what bothers people most about insurance companies is not how much profit they are making but how they are doing it. If they were doing a good job of covering people, being honest in covering claims and holding down I don't think their profits would be a problem. But they aren't doing any of those things.

There in lies more doublespeak/cognitive dissonance. If some of the nation, especially so called conservatives, claim that America is a Christian nation they seem to have no qualms about companies profiting off of the health of others. Truly demonstrates the strive for altruism and fairness that were taught in the New Testament. Well, so long as the altruism comes with a handsome profit and the fairness only applies to a particular sect of people. But still, it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter heaven. JC actually repeated that, yet it is conveniently ignored because most, if not all, Christians have considerable problem with living the life that is taught in the Bible.

Anyway, that's just a random tangent. Fact remains that what health insurance companies do is inherently inhuman and a massive conflict of interest: saving all lives isn't as profitable as saving some lives. They cherry pick for the best profits and escape blame by moving their marionette strings so that their serfs blame things on government regulation.

[SonOfSmeagol]

Hyperbole from politicians aside, I think what bothers people most about insurance companies is not how much profit they are making but how they are doing it. If they were doing a good job of covering people, being honest in covering claims and holding down I don't think their profits would be a problem. But they aren't doing any of those things.

Those things may be true to some extent, but I would say they are highly fixable in the scheme of things through better regulation and oversight.
============
But doesn’t it come down to cost? The ins companies have been a convenient scapegoat, but as we've seen the profits just aren't there. What about the cost contribution? Assuming this is more or less accurate – that there is over $2 trillion spent on healthcare each year and one-third ($700B) is wasted, I would think that not all of this, or even most of it, is directly and only attributable to ins companies (http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE59P0L320091026?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0)


Protection against malpractice: $200 - $300B a year
Fraud: up to $200B a year (fraudulent Medicare claims, kickbacks for referrals for unnecessary services and other scams)
Administrative inefficiency: about $150B a year
Medical mistakes: $50-$100B a year
Preventable conditions such as uncontrolled diabetes: $30-$50B a year
And most importantly, think about how any new legislation is going to fix this! Take a hard look at the details of whatever is proposed - the details of which are not available to you at this time by the way. I can guarantee that the best fix will not be through some partisan measure imposed upon the industry, unions, states, and whoever else doesn’t agree. It is way too big and wide-encompassing for that and it has to be collaborative. Unfortunately, a partisan measure appears to be where it's headed. Remember, any partisan measure done can be undone by future partisans.

Its the same drivel as the oil companies profits. Sure Exxon Mobil made a ton of money but their profit margins were not enough to call them windfalls, Plus XOM employs close to 80,000 people. They paid billions in taxes however Pelosi loves to grandstand, doesnt she realize that salaries need to be approved by the board of directors/shareholders?

It may well be that oil/energy companies are on the radar for future intervention.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Those things may be true to some extent, but I would say they are highly fixable in the scheme of things through better regulation and oversight.
============
But doesn’t it come down to cost? The ins companies have been a convenient scapegoat, but as we've seen the profits just aren't there. What about the cost contribution? Assuming this is more or less accurate – that there is over $2 trillion spent on healthcare each year and one-third ($700B) is wasted, I would think that not all of this, or even most of it, is directly and only attributable to ins companies (http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE59P0L320091026?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0)


Protection against malpractice: $200 - $300B a year
Fraud: up to $200B a year (fraudulent Medicare claims, kickbacks for referrals for unnecessary services and other scams)
Administrative inefficiency: about $150B a year
Medical mistakes: $50-$100B a year
Preventable conditions such as uncontrolled diabetes: $30-$50B a year
And most importantly, think about how any new legislation is going to fix this! Take a hard look at the details of whatever is proposed - the details of which are not available to you at this time by the way. I can guarantee that the best fix will not be through some partisan measure imposed upon the industry, unions, states, and whoever else doesn’t agree. It is way too big and wide-encompassing for that and it has to be collaborative. Unfortunately, a partisan measure appears to be where it's headed. Remember, any partisan measure done can be undone by future partisans.



It may well be that oil/energy companies are on the radar for future intervention.

Maxine Chavez Waters

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-e8Hwm8c_Q

[WRESTLINGFAN]

The latest version of this trainwreck was unveiled by her majesty Pelosi and its 2000 pages. So much for saving the trees

Turns out cash for clunkers was an epic fail costing taxpayers 24K per vehicle, but don't worry Queen Nancy will deliver the goods

[underdog]

Turns out cash for clunkers was an epic fail costing taxpayers 24K per vehicle, but don't worry Queen Nancy will deliver the goods

Source, please.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Source, please.

Edmunds.com did a study on it. But what do they know ? They are in the industy after all, Some lawyers from Chicago have all the answers Immediately they made Obamas enemies list


http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/29/news/economy/cash_for_clunkers_white_house_response/index.htm?section=money_latest

[underdog]

Edmunds.com did a study on it. But what do they know ? They are in the industy after all, Some lawyers from Chicago have all the answers Immediately they made Obamas enemies list


http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/29/news/economy/cash_for_clunkers_white_house_response/index.htm?section=money_latest

Thanks.

In response, Edmunds.com said Thursday that its figures were correct, and that the growth in GDP had more to do with naturally recovering auto sales and not with incentive programs.

So basically, it's a guess at why the auto sales recovered. Great.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

So the latest scheme says that it will cost 894 billion over 10 years. Its going to be at least 1.5 trillion when everything is done

[Syd]

Drop in the bucket compared to the loss of productivity from lack of health insurance. To be even more speculative, there will be an uptick in productivity as less people needlessly die every year. Have to spend money to make money to throw in some meaningless free market jibber jabber.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Drop in the bucket compared to the loss of productivity from lack of health insurance. To be even more speculative, there will be an uptick in productivity as less people needlessly die every year. Have to spend money to make money to throw in some meaningless free market jibber jabber.

Deficits and debt dont count anymore, Imagine being a small business owner trying to read all that garbage printed in that bill? People complain that their credit card and mortgages have too much fine print and is too complicated. Just think of the hundreds of billions of fraud and waste

[Syd]

Deficits and debt dont count anymore, Imagine being a small business owner trying to read all that garbage printed in that bill? People complain that their credit card and mortgages have too much fine print and is too complicated. Just think of the hundreds of billions of fraud and waste

it's not my fault people are illiterate/impatient

[Dude!]

it's pay back time...
again


Section 2531, entitled “Medical Liability Alternatives,” establishes an incentive program for states to adopt and implement alternatives to medical liability litigation. …… [B]a state is not eligible for the incentive payments if that state puts a law on the books that limits attorneys’ fees or imposes caps on damages.

money talks

[Jujubees2]

it's pay back time...
again




money talks


I AM OUTRAGED

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_eeKK-0Tr5q4/SpU-sG12ArI/AAAAAAAABOE/_ZusGnjOOkM/s400/JackieChiles.jpg

[Syd]

it's pay back time...
again




money talks

Pretty sure it's immoral and a conflict of interest for society to determine someone's worth in dollars as a person. That should be left solely to the parties involved to decide, not people like you or me looking from the outside in.

[SonOfSmeagol]

Pretty sure it's immoral and a conflict of interest for society to determine someone's worth in dollars as a person. That should be left solely to the parties involved to decide, not people like you or me looking from the outside in.

I'd place your dollar value at 198 of these:

http://cdn2.ioffer.com/img/item/394/925/31/o_NIXON_DOLLAR.jpg

[Dude!]

Pretty sure it's immoral and a conflict of interest for society to determine someone's worth in dollars as a person. That should be left solely to the parties involved to decide, not people like you or me looking from the outside in.

what a load

Britain has 'loser pays'
for good reason

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Heres a clip from Larry King in which Ron Paul was on. We can all agree that the problem is corporatism and managed care but he makes a strong case against a nanny state style gov't run program. He knows more about this than some hack like Reid or Pelosi


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hn6ad4_FzM

[Syd]

what a load

Britain has 'loser pays'
for good reason

So, you're against big government but you want your government to determine your worth to society?

[A.J.]

So, you're against big government but you want your government to determine your worth to society?

If that's what the death panels will be for, then count me in!

[Syd]

If that's what the death panels will be for, then count me in!

No it deals with setting caps on malpractice lawsuits which don't really have any strong bearing on healthcare costs. It's about ultimately limiting liability towards corporations when they cause damage on society. Hazardous wastes too expensive to dispose of properly? Just dump them in the ground, there are only 500 people that will be hurt by it and according to this here ruling, we'll only have to pay out $250k per. Much cheaper than having it sent to Somali waters to be dumped or worse yet a proper recycling plant!

[badmonkey]

No it deals with setting caps on malpractice lawsuits which don't really have any strong bearing on healthcare costs. It's about ultimately limiting liability towards corporations when they cause damage on society. Hazardous wastes too expensive to dispose of properly? Just dump them in the ground, there are only 500 people that will be hurt by it and according to this here ruling, we'll only have to pay out $250k per. Much cheaper than having it sent to Somali waters to be dumped or worse yet a proper recycling plant!

I don't think that malpractice includes improper hazardous waste disposal by large corporations, but I suppose the cap and trade bill could have been merged into the 2,000 page health care bill without anybody mentioning it.

[furie]

The health care bill headed for a vote in the House this week costs $1.2 trillion or more over a decade, according to numerous Democratic officials and figures contained in an analysis by congressional budget experts, far higher than the $900 billion cited by President Barack Obama as a price tag for his reform plan. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091102/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul)

[SonOfSmeagol]

No it deals with setting caps on malpractice lawsuits which don't really have any strong bearing on healthcare costs. It's about ultimately limiting liability towards corporations when they cause damage on society. Hazardous wastes too expensive to dispose of properly? Just dump them in the ground, there are only 500 people that will be hurt by it and according to this here ruling, we'll only have to pay out $250k per. Much cheaper than having it sent to Somali waters to be dumped or worse yet a proper recycling plant!

No idea what is meant by the hazardous waste thing, but, as has been pointed out protection against malpractice according to one source accounts for $200B-$300B a year, or 10%-14% of total healthcare costs. If that’s not “strong bearing” I don’t know what is.

[Syd]

I don't think that malpractice includes improper hazardous waste disposal by large corporations, but I suppose the cap and trade bill could have been merged into the 2,000 page health care bill without anybody mentioning it.

No, the point is that the precedent is set to limit damages that can be brought against someone, be it an individual doctor, a hospital or ultimately a corporation.

[Syd]

No idea what is meant by the hazardous waste thing, but, as has been pointed out protection against malpractice according to one source accounts for $200B-$300B a year, or 10%-14% of total healthcare costs. If that’s not “strong bearing” I don’t know what is.

http://makethemaccountable.com/myth/RisingCostOfMedicalMalpracticeInsurance.htm

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/In-the-Literature/2005/Jul/Health-Spending-in-the-United-States-and-the-Rest-of-the-Industrialized-World.aspx

Role of Malpractice Litigation
Another commonly cited contention is that medical malpractice litigation is driving up U.S. health spending. The authors compared malpractice claims data from the U.S., Australia, Canada, and the U.K., using information from national reports and databases. While the U.S. had 50 percent more malpractice claims filed per 1,000 population than the U.K. and Australia, and 350 percent more than Canada, payments were lower, on average, than those in Canada and the U.K. More important, average payments per capita were only $16 in the U.S. in 2001, compared with $12 in the U.K., $10 in Australia, and $4 in Canada. Including awards, legal fees, and underwriting costs, the total amount spent defending U.S. malpractice claims was an estimated $6.5 billion in 2001, or 0.46 percent of total health spending.

Just another reason for-profits aren't necessarily the best thing for healthcare. If the $200b-300b cost is true, a great deal of that is going directly towards corporate profit and not any actual hedge against malpractice.

I can only speak for myself but personally I am not a huge fan of corporate welfare. Perhaps you are and in which case I don't think we see eye to eye on this issue.

Seriously, wake the fuck up and stop listening to corporate shills looking to sell more advertisements on their shows.

[SonOfSmeagol]

http://makethemaccountable.com/myth/RisingCostOfMedicalMalpracticeInsurance.htm

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/In-the-Literature/2005/Jul/Health-Spending-in-the-United-States-and-the-Rest-of-the-Industrialized-World.aspx

Just another reason for-profits aren't necessarily the best thing for healthcare. If the $200b-300b cost is true, a great deal of that is going directly towards corporate profit and not any actual hedge against malpractice.

I can only speak for myself but personally I am not a huge fan of corporate welfare. Perhaps you are and in which case I don't think we see eye to eye on this issue.

Seriously, wake the fuck up and stop listening to corporate shills looking to sell more advertisements on their shows.

Not sure about those sources – when I see that they are least four years old my eyes kind of glaze over. You would think that if those thoughts were so important they would’ve been updated by now – especially in such a dynamic industry. Moreover, the first one is quite frankly not credible and basically deals with malpractice premiums and some other stuff. The point has been made – from a calmer source - that the insurance companies are apparently not reaping huge profits from the pockets of healthcare consumers. The second basically says health care costs are high – which no one is arguing against.

As for malpractice it must be litigation that is delivering the cash to lawyers and plaintiffs. How exactly this aspect would change under the various health care reform proposals out there I do not know.

Seriously, get some real sources that prove your (apparent) point that the healthcare industry is "getting well", so to speak. Actual corporate profit figures from the healthcare industry, with actual evidence about how extreme those profits are, would be helpful.

[Syd]

Not sure about those sources – when I see that they are least four years old my eyes kind of glaze over. You would think that if those thoughts were so important they would’ve been updated by now – especially in such a dynamic industry. Moreover, the first one is quite frankly not credible and basically deals with malpractice premiums and some other stuff. The point has been made – from a calmer source - that the insurance companies are apparently not reaping huge profits from the pockets of healthcare consumers. The second basically says health care costs are high – which no one is arguing against.

As for malpractice it must be litigation that is delivering the cash to lawyers and plaintiffs. How exactly this aspect would change under the various health care reform proposals out there I do not know.

Seriously, get some real sources that prove your (apparent) point that the healthcare industry is "getting well", so to speak. Actual corporate profit figures from the healthcare industry, with actual evidence about how extreme those profits are, would be helpful.


Those were real sources -- studies aren't constantly made. Given that America, as a whole, became more poor in the last decade the figures will likely be less. I am sorry that your corporate masters dance you so but the fact is, the healthcare industry is a corrupt mess that does little to make the nation more health (our LE is below that of all 1st world nations and rivals developing nations)

[Syd]

http://www.bankruptcycanada.com/blog/canadian-and-us-bankruptcy-rates/

Another problem:

If you get hurt, you may either

A) Be unable to afford the care which leads to a potential bankruptcy

B) Be incapable of receiving care, thus missing work and subsequently losing your job

Unfortunately this report is also several years old and so much has changed that in the past 5 years, we've put a man on the moon and Genghis Khan has overrun Persia.

[keithy_19]

I don't know. 1.2 trillion dollars seems like a steep price considering we don't really have that kind of money...

[WRESTLINGFAN]

I don't know. 1.2 trillion dollars seems like a steep price considering we don't really have that kind of money...

Not to worry, Either they will print the money therefore devalue the dollar even more or beg China for the cash like a crack addict needing his fix

[CurseoftheBambi]

So...how about that Republican health plan reform...


oh yeah..they dont have one

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/boehner-gop-health-care-plan-we-do-not-att

[badmonkey]

So...how about that Republican health plan reform...


oh yeah..they dont have one

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/boehner-gop-health-care-plan-we-do-not-att

Turns out that they do have one. (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9BO6PQO1&show_article=1)

[ope]

Turns out that they do have one. (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9BO6PQO1&show_article=1)

I'm glad they've finally bothered to show up to the party. Its only been what....6 months?

[badmonkey]

I'm glad they've finally bothered to show up to the party. Its only been what....6 months?

Yeah, but I think they actually wrote theirs.

[conman823]

I'm glad they've finally bothered to show up to the party. Its only been what....6 months?

Yeah, such a major change to the average citizen and to our economy should be rushed through before mid-term elections.

Why would we want to take our time with it?

[Syd]

Why would we want to take our time with it?

Should just keep kicking the can; healthcare reform has only been needed for the past half-century. Why rush it?

[badmonkey]

Should just keep kicking the can; healthcare reform has only been needed for the past half-century. Why rush it?

The Democratic plan isn't going to take effect until 2013. If it's so great and so urgently needed, why not put it into effect BEFORE Obama runs for re-election in 2012? If it's not going to go into effect until 2013, then why the rush at all?

[keithy_19]

The Democratic plan isn't going to take effect until 2013. If it's so great and so urgently needed, why not put it into effect BEFORE Obama runs for re-election in 2012? If it's not going to go into effect until 2013, then why the rush at all?

Can you please stop making Obama out to be some kind of politican who cares more about being reelected than actually 'fixing' healthcare. Sheesh.

[badmonkey]

Can you please stop making Obama out to be some kind of politican who cares more about being reelected than actually 'fixing' healthcare. Sheesh.

I will if he will. :wink:

[HBox]

Turns out that they do have one. (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9BO6PQO1&show_article=1)

When it's biggest selling point is how many pages it is you know it has to be good.

[badmonkey]

When it's biggest selling point is how many pages it is you know it has to be good.

I think you mean, how many pages it isn't.

[TheMojoPin]

I think the Republicans have zero interest in any kind of health care coverage reform. Once their turn comes back around again it will not show up on their agenda in any kind of meaningful form. This current proposal is nothing more than a paltry effort to mask that they're simply opposed to any kind of health care coverage reform presented by the Democrats. It's cute that they made the effort, but they should really just cop to not giving a damn about the issue and never conceding anything initiated by the Democrats.

[TheMojoPin]

Can you please stop making Obama out to be some kind of politican who cares more about being reelected than actually 'fixing' healthcare. Sheesh.

So the dual tract that you and your buddies have running in the last few posts is both that the Democrats should get the reform through quicker AND that they're rushing too fast to put through something so important. Gotcha.

[HBox]

I think you mean, how many pages it isn't.

Considering how much it doesn't do it's still pretty long.

I think the Republicans have zero interest in any kind of health care coverage reform. Once their turn comes back around again it will not show up on their agenda in any kind of meaningful form. This current proposal is nothing more than a paltry effort to mask that they're simply opposed to any kind of health care coverage reform presented by the Democrats. It's cute that they made the effort, but they should really just cop to not giving a damn about the issue and never conceding anything initiated by the Democrats.

Of course they have no interest. They had complete power in Washington for years and did this ever come close to reaching the agenda? No.

[badmonkey]

So the dual tract that you and your buddies have running in the last few posts is both that the Democrats should get the reform through quicker AND that they're rushing too fast to put through something so important. Gotcha.

Wrong. The dual tract has been run by you and your buddies that Health Care Reform must be passed immediately in order to avoid great catastrophe but it doesn't have to take effect until after 2013. The question that was posed is, why the great big hurry to pass it RIGHT NOW if it isn't going to even attempt to address the issue for 4 years?

We're not the ones with the doublespeak here. We're just quoting you.

[TheMojoPin]

Wrong. The dual tract has been run by you and your buddies that Health Care Reform must be passed immediately in order to avoid great catastrophe but it doesn't have to take effect until after 2013. The question that was posed is, why the great big hurry to pass it RIGHT NOW if it isn't going to even attempt to address the issue for 4 years?

We're not the ones with the doublespeak here. We're just quoting you.

Where was I quoted?

Where did I say any of this? I've never said it "has to be passed immediately to avoid great catastrophe." I've never said it had to be passed "RIGHT NOW."

My post was talking about the posts just on the last page where we have people simultaneously slamming the initiative for both taking too long and being too rushed. Which is it?

[high fly]

No it deals with setting caps on malpractice lawsuits which don't really have any strong bearing on healthcare costs. It's about ultimately limiting liability towards corporations when they cause damage on society. Hazardous wastes too expensive to dispose of properly? Just dump them in the ground, there are only 500 people that will be hurt by it and according to this here ruling, we'll only have to pay out $250k per. Much cheaper than having it sent to Somali waters to be dumped or worse yet a proper recycling plant!


One would think the conservatives would recognize this was just "the market" deciding and adherents of Sowell would be opposed to artificially restricting the market with government interference.
TRUE conservatives would oppose restrictions on malpractice awards.....

[badmonkey]

Where was I quoted?

Where did I say any of this? I've never said it "has to be passed immediately to avoid great catastrophe." I've never said it had to be passed "RIGHT NOW."

My post was talking about the posts just on the last page where we have people simultaneously slamming the initiative for both taking too long and being too rushed. Which is it?

Sorry, I had to post that quick cuz I had to deal with something else. I meant the general you, like "you guys" or the Democratic Party you. You are exactly right when you ask "Which is it?" and I'm asking too. Which is it? Is it an urgent crisis that must be dealt with now or can it wait to go into effect until 2013?

[SonOfSmeagol]

I wonder just how many of the House members have actually read the bill. If someone was to spend just 3 lousy minutes (for example) a page reading this 2000 page bill that’s 100 hours.

Hmmm: at 1.2 Trillion – (that’s $1,200,000,000,000) and about 2000 pages that comes to about 600 Million (that’s $600,000,000) a page.

They better read the fucking thing at $600,000,000 a page, and they should probably take more than 3 minutes a page to do it.

And then be able to look you in the eye and tell you, all the emotional bullshit aside, that it saves money. Show me the savings.

Seriously, can these people do anything other than spend, borrow, and tax; and then hide behind some ridiculous bureaucratic pile of paper? I’m pissed.

[HBox]

I wonder just how many of the House members have actually read the bill. If someone was to spend just 3 lousy minutes (for example) a page reading this 2000 page bill that’s 100 hours.

Hmmm: at 1.2 Trillion – (that’s $1,200,000,000,000) and about 2000 pages that comes to about 600 Million (that’s $600,000,000) a page.

They better read the fucking thing at $600,000,000 a page, and they should probably take more than 3 minutes a page to do it.

And then be able to look you in the eye and tell you, all the emotional bullshit aside, that it saves money. Show me the savings.

Seriously, can these people do anything other than spend, borrow, and tax; and then hide behind some ridiculous bureaucratic pile of paper? I’m pissed.

This is how the bill is handled in the Finance Committee. They know what is in the bill. (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/09/dont_read_the_bill.html)

As for how the bill will save money you will have to take it up with the CBO. They definitely read the entire bill and made estimates and explained their reasoning behind the estimates. And they are the ones saying that the two major bills being considered will reduce the deficit.

[Dude!]

tonight's election results
just killed a big healthcare bill

[HBox]

tonight's election results
just killed a big healthcare bill

Two governors races have nothing to do with health care.

[underdog]

tonight's election results
just killed a big healthcare bill

I hope it passes so can finally get your new lung.

[Dude!]

Two governors races have nothing to do with health care.

they have everything to do
with how house and senate members vote

you have so much to learn

[Dude!]

I hope it passes so can finally get your new lung.

well i hope it does pass so that
the government makes you
lose 100 pounds

[HBox]

I hope it passes so you two can get some counseling and resolve your differences.

[ope]

they have everything to do
with how house and senate members vote

you have so much to learn

We really need to get you to a civics class.

[Dude!]

I hope it passes so you two can get some counseling and resolve your differences.

if the govt pays for it,
i'll go for the counseling

[Dude!]

We really need to get you to a civics class.

drive me to class
in your civic, treehugger

[Syd]

they have everything to do
with how house and senate members vote

you have so much to learn

yeah, house and senate members just found out that being a bluedog doesn't win any elections now

[keithy_19]

I hope it passes so you two can get some counseling and resolve your differences.

I spit up a little. I needed that. Thank you.

[underdog]

well i hope it does pass so that
the government makes you
lose 100 pounds

NEVER!

drive me to class
in your civic, treehugger

He drives a Prius, silly.

[keithy_19]

NEVER!

Good for you!

He drives a Prius, silly.

What a queer he is.

[ope]

So here is what I know about the House bill (H.R. 3962):


10 years at a total price tag of $894 billion.
96% coverage
Includes a public option
A geographic adjustment of medicare payments
A value index for providers based on quality measures
New payment mechanisms, including value-based purchasing


Its an interesting bill that deserves a serious look. Its not perfect, but I'll give the House credit for tackling the issue in a serious manner...unlike the Senate which seems to be a mess (no thanks to Harry Reid).

[Syd]

Its an interesting bill that deserves a serious look. Its not perfect, but I'll give the House credit for tackling the issue in a serious manner...unlike the Senate which seems to be a
mess (no thanks to Harry Reid).

The Dodd bill is a bit better: it comes in at $600b, includes a public option and hits 97% coverage. It's the only real reform bill that has a chance of passing. Anything else is a give-away for insurance companies.

[SonOfSmeagol]

This is how the bill is handled in the Finance Committee. They know what is in the bill. (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/09/dont_read_the_bill.html)

As for how the bill will save money you will have to take it up with the CBO. They definitely read the entire bill and made estimates and explained their reasoning behind the estimates. And they are the ones saying that the two major bills being considered will reduce the deficit.

The CBO has some rigid constraints and assumptions it has to operate within. That said I know that I have used the CBO in the past to try to make a point in my favor, but in as far as the magnitude of this House bill goes I think it deserves some serious scrutiny. What does the price tag have to be before people say: c’mon man, show me the real deal? Is not $1.2 Trillion or thereabouts enough? What if it was $1.5 Trillion or $2.0 Trillion, or even just a measly $900 Billion as the House said it was JUST LATE LAST WEEK before the CBO did it's thing! What's $300 Billion! This thing has a POLITICAL life of it's own and...ARRRGGGHH!

Suffice to say that it bothers me when the Gov't says it has to spend 1.2 Trillion to save money!!!

House Health Care Bill Neither ‘Durable’ Nor ‘Desirable’ Says Former CBO Director (http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/56508)

Weighing a McCain Economist (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/business/23leonhardt.html)

“It front-loads all of the taxes and back-loads all of the spending so as to give the appearance of balance over the 10-year window,”
This is very convenient say with the 2012 election and all that.

"the House bill employs budget “gimmicks” to hide its true cost and make the bill appear fiscally responsible while creating another federal entitlement program that Congress will not be able to pay for"

“The heart of this bill is to repeat two of the greatest policy errors this country has made: to create large, unfunded entitlement spending programs, and to have a tax law that is not politically viable over the long haul”

[HBox]

The CBO has some rigid constraints and assumptions it has to operate within. That said I know that I have used the CBO in the past to try to make a point in my favor, but in as far as the magnitude of this House bill goes I think it deserves some serious scrutiny. What does the price tag have to be before people say: c’mon man, show me the real deal? Is not $1.2 Trillion or thereabouts enough? What if it was $1.5 Trillion or $2.0 Trillion, or even just a measly $900 Billion as the House said it was JUST LATE LAST WEEK before the CBO did it's thing! What's $300 Billion! This thing has a POLITICAL life of it's own and...ARRRGGGHH!

Suffice to say that it bothers me when the Gov't says it has to spend 1.2 Trillion to save money!!!

House Health Care Bill Neither ‘Durable’ Nor ‘Desirable’ Says Former CBO Director (http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/56508)

Weighing a McCain Economist (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/business/23leonhardt.html)

“It front-loads all of the taxes and back-loads all of the spending so as to give the appearance of balance over the 10-year window,”
This is very convenient say with the 2012 election and all that.

"the House bill employs budget “gimmicks” to hide its true cost and make the bill appear fiscally responsible while creating another federal entitlement program that Congress will not be able to pay for"

“The heart of this bill is to repeat two of the greatest policy errors this country has made: to create large, unfunded entitlement spending programs, and to have a tax law that is not politically viable over the long haul”

If there are any tricks the CBO will find them in their final analysis. That being said the cost being thrown around is not that important if it doesn't add to the deficit. If it costs $500 billion and adds 100 billion to the deficit or $1.2 trillion and is budget neutral do you really want the $500 million plan? I think Obama made a big mistake when he put a limit at $900 billion. It doesn't matter if it is deficit neutral. You could say that even if is budget neutral you are uncomfortable with that level government spending. I'd counter that we've left this spending in the hands of private industry for quite a lone time and costs have skyrocketed. We've given them much more time than they deserve and costs keep going up and instead of the government taking the money it's just going out the door in insurance costs because of the many ways money is wasted. So I'd say that putting more of that spending in the hands of the government will help constrain costs and in the end save people money.

As for the tax issue. Obama and Congress should definitely tackle that before his term is up, and hopefully soon.

[SonOfSmeagol]

We've given them much more time than they deserve and costs keep going up and instead of the government taking the money it's just going out the door in insurance costs because of the many ways money is wasted. So I'd say that putting more of that spending in the hands of the government will help constrain costs and in the end save people money.

But as we’ve seen the costs are not the “fault” of the ins companies - they’re just not making the revenues and profits that people want to seem to claim, and they are not the sole source of “wasting” funds. The cost structure is much more complicated and to think that the gov’t can solve that is naïve. I just don’t see putting more spending in the hands of the gov’t will help as there is no track record of the U.S. gov’t ever doing so with any business venture – especially one so primarily dependent on supply and demand. As I’ve said reform is so needed but I disagree with this approach. We need to look at a comprehensive solution accepted by more stakeholders and a ramrod political approach will simply not work.

As for the tax issue. Obama and Congress should definitely tackle that before his term is up, and hopefully soon.

I’m not sure what that means – the bill relies on a huge amount of new taxes and if they then retract them then the program will not be paid for and will go very negative very quickly to the tune of 100’s of billions of $.

[Syd]

I just don’t see putting more spending in the hands of the gov’t will help as there is no track record of the U.S. gov’t ever doing so with any business venture – especially one so primarily dependent on supply and demand. As I’ve said reform is so needed but I disagree with this approach. We need to look at a com.

There's no track record of private insurers succeeding. The fact that society has to step in and correct things is pretty much proof that private industry isn't truly up to task with protecting the health of the public.

[SonOfSmeagol]

There's no track record of private insurers succeeding. The fact that society has to step in and correct things is pretty much proof that private industry isn't truly up to task with protecting the health of the public.

As I said reform is needed, but what you say are platitudes. You continue to blame the insurers with no quantitative evidence. How do you measure private insurers failure or success? To stretch - how is it their responsibility to cover every last person regardless of circumstance and cost? And how exactly is Gov't going to ensure that exactly within reasonable cost? And WTF is "society"? Central Gov't Control? If so how has the U.S. Gov't EVER stepped in and "corrected things" when it come to a multi-Trillion $ free enterprise similar to health care? Where's that track record?

[Syd]

As I said reform is needed, but what you say are platitudes. You continue to blame the insurers with no quantitative evidence. How do you measure private insurers failure or success?

I measure their failure by our life expectancies not growing while their premiums continue to rise. I don't necessarily need the same % increase on premiums, but you'd expect Americans as a whole are living longer considering we are paying more. That's not to say that, as a whole, we already pay more in public and private costs for a lower life expectancy than the rest of the world. So I know there's no evidence other than Americans living shorter lives than virtually all industrialized nations and I'll concede that point to you.

To stretch - how is it their responsibility to cover every last person regardless of circumstance and cost?

It isn't? Universal health care isn't as profitable as denying and purging costly policy holders.

And how exactly is Gov't going to ensure that exactly within reasonable cost?

Copy what every other industrialized nation does that allows their people to live longer lives?

If Macau, Andorra, Japan, Singapore, San Marino, Hong Kong, Australia, Canada, France, Sweden, Switzerland, Guernsey, Israel, Iceland, Anguilla, Cayman Islands, Bermuda, New Zealand, Italy, Gibraltar, Monaco, Liechtenstein, Spain, Norway, Jersey, Greece, Austria, Faroe Islands, Malta, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Germany, Belgium, St Pierre & Miquelon, US Virgin Islands, United Kingdom, Finland, Jordan, Isle of Man, South Korea, Puerto Rico, Bosnia & Herzegovina, St Helena, Cyprus, Denmark, Ireland, Portugal and Wallis & Futuna can all have better life expectancies yet still pay less in private and public costs than the US, I'd suspect there's some sort of formula other governments have happened upon and it might be something that 49 other countries might share the information on.

And WTF is "society"? Central Gov't Control? If so how has the U.S. Gov't EVER stepped in and "corrected things" when it come to a multi-Trillion $ free enterprise similar to health care? Where's that track record?

Society is you, me and the government. Government is the tool for the population to protect itself and enrich itself. Many politicians have decided the best way for them to steal money from you is to tell you that government isn't something you can influence and isn't something to be trusted. Or, that it is the problem. It's kind of funny that Reagan could have been so literal when he said government is the problem while he gutted the nation and sold it all off on wholesale.

As far as massive government programs that have been run successfully, you might try looking into the second largest employer by number of employees. Once you find that out, find out who the largest employer is by number of employees. Let me know which one you think is run better and if there are any peopleof_________.com sites about it.

[SonOfSmeagol]

Copy what every other industrialized nation does that allows their people to live longer lives? (list of countries} can all have better life expectancies yet still pay less in private and public costs than the US, I'd suspect there's some sort of formula other governments have happened upon and it might be something that 49 other countries might share the information on.

… Government is the tool for the population to protect itself and enrich itself. …

As far as massive government programs that have been run successfully, you might try looking into the second largest employer by number of employees. Once you find that out, find out who the largest employer is by number of employees. Let me know which one you think is run better and if there are any peopleof_________.com sites about it.

"Formula that other governments have happened upon?" First, you say this as if this list, and this sole fact, means gov’t is the largest contributing factor in these countries having longer life expectancies than U.S. What about climate, diet, lifestyle, smoking, drinking, obesity, able-bodied people on welfare, meth/cocaine/heroin addiction, infant mortality, etc etc etc due to all of the above and the countless other individual choices that this and other countries have to respond to? Second, and most important to your point, have these countries shared this invaluable info with the US and how, exactly, is it included in the bills being proposed. If not, your Gov’t has let you down.


Gov’t is the “tool” for neither. It does not give me anything, nor do I expect anything, to protect me (other than a common defense) nor enrich me. It provides the framework for the individual to do these things.


You have something to say about how well some huge gov’t program is run then say it and support it. I’m not going to run off on some kind of research project.

[Serpico1103]

...infant mortality, etc etc etc due to all of the above and the countless other individual choices that this and other countries have to respond to?

Gov’t is the “tool” for neither. They do not give me anything, nor do I expect anything, to protect me (other than a common defense) nor enrich me. They provide the framework for the individual to do these things.



First, I didn't consider infant mortality an "individual choice."
Second, if you really think the government doesn't give you ANYTHING other than a "common defense", than without wanting to be insulting, you are delusional!

[SonOfSmeagol]

First, I didn't consider infant mortality an "individual choice."
Second, if you really think the government doesn't give you ANYTHING other than a "common defense", than without wanting to be insulting, you are delusional!

OK I’ll back off on the infant mortality thing, except to say that maybe some mothers should reconsider, or at least wait on, becoming mothers and/or stop having babies they cannot support, and to that end I totally support family planning.

As a big time taxpayer maybe you can help me with what exactly the gov’t “gives” me that I don’t pay dearly for.

[Serpico1103]

OK I’ll back off on the infant mortality thing, except to say that maybe some mothers should reconsider, or at least wait on, becoming mothers and/or stop having babies they cannot support, and to that end I totally support family planning.

As a big time taxpayer maybe you can help me with what exactly the gov’t “gives” me that I don’t pay dearly for.

I don't think the baby has a choice. Sure, many mothers do not get the proper prenatal care they need; either due to systemic or individual problems.

You pay for your "common defense." So, when you say "give" are you asking me what you get for free or what you receive for your taxes?
http://www.wikinvest.com/concept/Government_Regulatory_Agencies

I am sure you would think some of these agencies are unnecessary, but all of them?
And that is only the federal agencies, not the local agencies that are also supported by your tax dollars, like your "common defense."

[SonOfSmeagol]

I don't think the baby has a choice. Sure, many mothers do not get the proper prenatal care they need; either due to systemic or individual problems.

You pay for your "common defense." So, when you say "give" are you asking me what you get for free or what you receive for your taxes?
http://www.wikinvest.com/concept/Government_Regulatory_Agencies
I am sure you would think some of these agencies are unnecessary, but all of them?
And that is only the federal agencies, not the local agencies that are also supported by your tax dollars, like your "common defense."

I didn’t say the baby did – as I said the mother does. So, hypothetically, maybe the unemployed mother who cannot afford the children she has and doesn’t know how to take care of, should avoid having more children she cannot support. It is an individual decision (although it would seem to me to be common sense), supported by systemic lack of education that does not clearly inform the individual that maybe it’s not the best thing to have more babies you cannot support.


What’s the point here? I pay so much in Fed, State, Local, Excise, Personal Property, Sales, Cap Gains taxes (many MANY 10s of thousands of dollars every year to the tune of 40-50% of my income) that I have an extremely hard time thinking I get anything for free my friend. That said, there is so much waste in gov’t it's not even funny.

[epo]

HR 3962 passed. Now let's see what Harry Reid can do in the Senate.

[HBox]

I'm sure the same people who drove out Scozzafava in NY have already raised $10 billion to oust Joe Cao.

[Serpico1103]

What’s the point here? I pay so much in Fed, State, Local, Excise, Personal Property, Sales, Cap Gains taxes (many MANY 10s of thousands of dollars every year to the tune of 40-50% of my income) that I have an extremely hard time thinking I get anything for free my friend. That said, there is so much waste in gov’t it's not even funny.

I am not saying you get anything for free. Need a handout?

I am saying- you pay taxes, you get services for that. Can the government be more efficient? YES!!!!! Is our common defense the only necessary service provided? NO!!!!!!!!!

In the 20th century we have had a 90% tax rate. So, maybe the mid-30s isn't that bad.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

HR 3962 passed. Now let's see what Harry Reid can do in the Senate.

220-215 The strong arming of Pelosi and Obama Worked. Hopefully this clusterfuck of a bill dies in the Senate

[Ogre]

It is a dark day for America. Working Americans who will have to work hard to stay out of jail and not get fined by the Government so we can subsidize the health care of those who do not work hard and produce. I used to be a citizen and an employee, now I am merely a worker.

http://www.discriminations.us/obama-obey-poster.png

[HBox]

It is a dark day for America. Working Americans who will have to work hard to stay out of jail and not get fined by the Government so we can subsidize the health care of those who do not work hard and produce. I used to be a citizen and an employee, now I am merely a worker.

http://www.discriminations.us/obama-obey-poster.png

Here's a guy who has no idea what he is talking about.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

The shrillness of Pelosi is enough to make me sick 2000 pages of garbage that will be another government run fiasco. Spare me the dramatics from John Dingell who succeeded his father 55 years ago, like that parasite really know what its like to work in the real world Doesnt look too good in the Senate though but im sure Barry will pay them a visit

[IMSlacker]

My death panel application is in the mail. Fingers crossed!

[Ogre]

Here's a guy who has no idea what he is talking about.

Keep drinking your kool aid. yeah yeah you'll post about all the heartbreak you have witnessed first hand. And how I am some uninformed rube. I have read it all before. The simple fact is that there are much much better ways to fix the broken health care system then to saddle ALL Americans with the costs. It is senseless to post arguments here because with many like yourself there is no reasoning. Only blind compliance to your anointed Government saviors. Do you really think Pelosi and Obama give a fuck about middle America. If you do you are a disillusioned creature.

Question for you. If with a Magic Wand they can save billions in Medicare fraud then why wait for this legislation to do it? It is a SCAM.

[HBox]

Keep drinking your kool aid. yeah yeah you'll post about all the heartbreak you have witnessed first hand. And how I am some uninformed rube. I have read it all before. The simple fact is that there are much much better ways to fix the broken health care system then to saddle ALL Americans with the costs. It is senseless to post arguments here because with many like yourself there is no reasoning. Only blind compliance to your anointed Government saviors. Do you really think Pelosi and Obama give a fuck about middle America. If you do you are a disillusioned creature.

Question for you. If with a Magic Wand they can save billions in Medicare fraud then why wait for this legislation to do it? It is a SCAM.

No, I'll just point out that you have no idea what the bill does. No one is going to jail if they don't get insurance. ALL Americans aren't saddled with the costs. The House bill taxes the wealthy. The Senate bill reduces the deduction for health care premiums which will only affect the most expensive health plans. And both plans reduce the deficit. And to answer your question, the biggest thing they are going to do is eliminate or drastically scale back Medicare Advantage, a program in which private insurers are paid to handle the care of seniors. It's turned out to be more expensive that traditional Medicare because of significantly higher administrative costs, essentially wasting money that goes straight into the insurers pockets. That's one of many things they are planning to do.

If that's too heart-wrenching I can tone down the emotion.

[TheMojoPin]

Go apple!

Come on orange!

GO BANANA!

[Dude!]

Go apple!

Come on oranage!

GO BANANA!

i love oranage juice

potatoe, anyone?

[TheMojoPin]

The blood and oranage on the scene was horrifying.

[Serpico1103]

It is a dark day for America. Working Americans who will have to work hard to stay out of jail and not get fined by the Government so we can subsidize the health care of those who do not work hard and produce. I used to be a citizen and an employee, now I am merely a worker.


I miss the good old days before socialist movements forced employers to pay livable wages and stop child labor.
Damn socialism, that is the problem with kids today, not enough black lung disease.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

how many people were having C Span parties last night while the votes were being counted

[hanso]

I am not saying you get anything for free. Need a handout?

I am saying- you pay taxes, you get services for that. Can the government be more efficient? YES!!!!! Is our common defense the only necessary service provided? NO!!!!!!!!!

In the 20th century we have had a 90% tax rate. So, maybe the mid-30s isn't that bad.

It befuddles me how folks don't seem to want something back from tax put in. When it comes to matters like these.
It isn't that often the public has opportunities like this. They are few and far between.
Monies will come from other areas like stopping the war/wars. And reversing the damage that Bush put in.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Don't celebrate just yet as it will meet its fate in the Senate.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul

[zentraed]

Keep drinking your kool aid. yeah yeah you'll post about all the heartbreak you have witnessed first hand. And how I am some uninformed rube. I have read it all before. The simple fact is that there are much much better ways to fix the broken health care system then to saddle ALL Americans with the costs. It is senseless to post arguments here because with many like yourself there is no reasoning. Only blind compliance to your anointed Government saviors. Do you really think Pelosi and Obama give a fuck about middle America. If you do you are a disillusioned creature.

Question for you. If with a Magic Wand they can save billions in Medicare fraud then why wait for this legislation to do it? It is a SCAM.

Politically, it's pretty much impossible to do health care reforms one step at a time. You target one group, they'll lobby hard to fight losing their billions of dollars. Insurance companies agreed to abandon pre-existing conditions because of an individual mandate guaranteeing millions of new customers. Early on Obama got the pharmaceutical companies to agree to billions of losses in profits. Like HBox said, the Medicare cuts are to subsidies that go to private insurers. This was a comprehensive reform measure that nearly every player in the health industry has agreed to. There were no magic wands. It's taken all year and we still don't have a signed bill yet.

[Serpico1103]

Keep drinking your kool aid. yeah yeah you'll post about all the heartbreak you have witnessed first hand. And how I am some uninformed rube. I have read it all before. The simple fact is that there are much much better ways to fix the broken health care system then to saddle ALL Americans with the costs. It is senseless to post arguments here because with many like yourself there is no reasoning. Only blind compliance to your anointed Government saviors. Do you really think Pelosi and Obama give a fuck about middle America. If you do you are a disillusioned creature.

Question for you. If with a Magic Wand they can save billions in Medicare fraud then why wait for this legislation to do it? It is a SCAM.

Keep drinking your kool aid. yeah yeah you'll post about all the heartbreak you have witnessed first hand. And how I am some uninformed rube. I have read it all before. The simple fact is that there are much much better ways to keep us safe instead of invading Iraq. It is senseless to post arguments here because with many like yourself there is no reasoning. Only blind compliance to your anointed Government saviors. Do you really think Bush or Cheny give a fuck about middle America. If you do you are a disillusioned creature.

Question for you. If Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, where are they? It is a SCAM.

[Dude!]

Question for you. If Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, where are they? It is a SCAM.

Bush is a liar
Obama is a liar

[Syd]

Keep drinking your kool aid. yeah yeah you'll post about all the heartbreak you have witnessed first hand. And how I am some uninformed rube. I have read it all before. The simple fact is that there are much much better ways to fix the broken health care system then to saddle ALL Americans with the costs.

Actually, if you weren't so naive you'd realize the best and easiest way to reduce premiums is to mandate everyone have coverage. It's easier to ablate cost over a population, instead of just a segment of the population.

[high fly]

Actually, if you weren't so naive you'd realize the best and easiest way to reduce premiums is to mandate everyone have coverage. It's easier to ablate cost over a population, instead of just a segment of the population.



Waywaywaywayway wait a minute here.
Are you trying to tell me that if more people pay for the same thing fewer people are paying for now, that the cost will be less?

[Syd]

Waywaywaywayway wait a minute here.
Are you trying to tell me that if more people pay for the same thing fewer people are paying for now, that the cost will be less?

Think of it as a sort of reverse economy of scale that is shaped more like a V that only extends halfway up the right handed side. Right now, too many unhealthy people are in the system and not enough healthy people. Healthy people generally do not seek insurance and thus don't contribute to the costs of the unhealthy. However, due to the nature of health insurance -- that it isn't really insurance at all and in actuality a necessity it works out so that there's a consistent amount of healthy people in the system to offset the unhealthy people. Moreso once the baby boomer generation dies off and there isn't such a massive imbalance between generations.

[SonOfSmeagol]

I don’t think he understands, and my guess is that he’s a long way off from your point of view. A much more detailed explanation is necessary to bring him around.:popcorn:

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Why is it that every day the number of uninsured changes. One day its 50 million then its 40, ive heard 47 million, 46 Million

That number is way overstated. For example there are 20 million people here illegally who don't deserve any benefits

[Syd]

Why is it that every day the number of uninsured changes. One day its 50 million then its 40, ive heard 47 million, 46 Million

That number is way overstated. For example there are 20 million people here illegally who don't deserve any benefits

Depends on how you count it -- you can count illegal immigrants that supposedly are counted. Now normally there wouldn't be as there are no real government records on illegal immigrants, only estimates. Regardless, the point isn't worth fighting because the number is non-zero.

Second up is the number of people who are underinsured -- technically having insurance, but it's inadequate for real care. Then there are people who are insured but don't have the ability to pay for co-pays and people who can't afford actual treatment. That can be part of the aforementioned group or it might not be.

A legitimate number is somewhere between 50-100 million people have inadequate healthcare. Either no healthcare whatsoever, or are the working poor and incapable of affording care for an injury or illness. They're the people who inevitably cost us either through lost work, unpaid bills to hospitals and other forced costs on the public.

There's no two ways around it, people getting hurt and people getting sick or developing a disease cost us. Why not finally admit that we don't live in our own perfect bubble?

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Depends on how you count it -- you can count illegal immigrants that supposedly are counted. Now normally there wouldn't be as there are no real government records on illegal immigrants, only estimates. Regardless, the point isn't worth fighting because the number is non-zero.

Second up is the number of people who are underinsured -- technically having insurance, but it's inadequate for real care. Then there are people who are insured but don't have the ability to pay for co-pays and people who can't afford actual treatment. That can be part of the aforementioned group or it might not be.

A legitimate number is somewhere between 50-100 million people have inadequate healthcare. Either no healthcare whatsoever, or are the working poor and incapable of affording care for an injury or illness. They're the people who inevitably cost us either through lost work, unpaid bills to hospitals and other forced costs on the public.

There's no two ways around it, people getting hurt and people getting sick or developing a disease cost us. Why not finally admit that we don't live in our own perfect bubble?

Whatever number it is , They represent people. How many of them are Americans?. Thats what should be the deciding factor. Not someone who hopped a fence or overstayed their visa. Illegal aliens are not Americans and shouldnt be placed in the uninsured category

[angrymissy]

Whatever number it is , They represent people. How many of them are Americans?. Thats what should be the deciding factor. Not someone who hopped a fence or overstayed their visa. Illegal aliens are not Americans and shouldnt be placed in the uninsured category

Out of the 47 million, 34.380M are native born citizens, 2.384M are naturalized citizens, and 10.231M are not Citizens. That is why you heard Obama mention 37M in his speech, he wasn't counting illegal aliens.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/p60-233.pdf

[WRESTLINGFAN]

We have Medicare/Medicaid for children theres SCHIP. Many of these programs include people making incomes above the federal poverty level. I dont remember the exact percentage

Why wreck everything for a massive bloated entitlement program. Fix the programs that we have already target the fraud and waste. Allow more than 5 or 6 companies in a state and there will be competion.

A public option will have efficency? Think of the postal service, or DMV with the size and enforcement of the IRS

[underdog]

A public option will have efficency? Think of the postal service, or DMV with the size and enforcement of the IRS

You can send a letter ANYWHERE in the United States for less than $0.50.

The RMV is Massachusetts is incredibly organized and easy to use.

Are you saying the IRS doesn't get their money?

[WRESTLINGFAN]

You can send a letter ANYWHERE in the United States for less than $0.50.

The RMV is Massachusetts is incredibly organized and easy to use.

Are you saying the IRS doesn't get their money?

Look how much cash the USPS is burning thru. They are poised to lose billions more this year. Massachusetts is a small state. Try having the same success in NY. Yes the IRS gets their money but by threat of jail/heavy fines if necessary

This disaster is going to force people to have insurance and the gov't is going to use the wrath of the IRS to enforce that

[HBox]

This disaster is going to force people to have insurance and the gov't is going to use the wrath of the IRS to enforce that

No they are not.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

No they are not.

Heres a source

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=41241915

[HBox]

Heres a source

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=41241915

Of course I can't find the link. But I read a few days ago that after the initial criticism they changed it so that the IRS was not in charge of collecting the fines. I will post the link when I can find it again.

[Syd]

Look how much cash the USPS is burning thru. They are poised to lose billions more this year. Massachusetts is a small state. Try having the same success in NY. Yes the IRS gets their money but by threat of jail/heavy fines if necessary

This disaster is going to force people to have insurance and the gov't is going to use the wrath of the IRS to enforce that

The USPS isn't immune to the recession -- they're fully self-funded through their own revenue generation. It's not like they have a set amount that the government gives them, well, other than $0.

[Syd]

We have Medicare/Medicaid for children theres SCHIP. Many of these programs include people making incomes above the federal poverty level. I dont remember the exact percentage

I forget how it works, but for quite a few states children aren't eligible for SCHIP due to local salaries and the federally mandated poverty requirements it doesn't really provide any sort of meaningful coverage, only a smattering at best.

Why wreck everything for a massive bloated entitlement program. Fix the programs that we have already target the fraud and waste. Allow more than 5 or 6 companies in a state and there will be competion.

The problem with the entitlements is A) baby boomers and B) they're a popular target to raid for war funding. You're never going to defeat the voting block that is baby boomers and you'll never, ever defeat the military-industrial complex.

A public option will have efficency? Think of the postal service, or DMV with the size and enforcement of the IRS

Even if the public option is less efficient, it operates as a non-profit. It has a massive edge on for-profit companies.

[Bob Impact]

This isn't really related to the topic at hand but The USPS lost $2.8 Billion dollars last year and are considering cutting either 1,000 locations or Saturday delivery. This loss was lead primarily by the fact that they are forced to prefund a significant chunk of their benefits fund... pay attention to how often you'll hear the word "prefund" from congress in the coming weeks.

http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/testimony/2009/pr09_pmg0128.htm

[Syd]

That's the nature of an increasingly automated society. There are less doers and more consumers. One is replaced and moved into the category of consumer. With the USPS, it is mainly temporary. The permanent loss of jobs was beginning in the 90s but was mainly buoyed by the strong economy. They'll be right as rain by 2015 as the last of the jobs that can be automated are made redundant.

[high fly]

Originally Posted by high fly
Waywaywaywayway wait a minute here.
Are you trying to tell me that if more people pay for the same thing fewer people are paying for now, that the cost will be less?

Think of it as a sort of reverse economy of scale that is shaped more like a V that only extends halfway up the right handed side. Right now, too many unhealthy people are in the system and not enough healthy people. Healthy people generally do not seek insurance and thus don't contribute to the costs of the unhealthy. However, due to the nature of health insurance -- that it isn't really insurance at all and in actuality a necessity it works out so that there's a consistent amount of healthy people in the system to offset the unhealthy people. Moreso once the baby boomer generation dies off and there isn't such a massive imbalance between generations.


Well, see, I look at it like this.
Let's say there is a piece of property for sale we want to buy an we know a few more people who are interested in going in on it.
If there are 5 of us who divide up the cost, it will be more expensive for each of us compared to if there are 8 of us dividing the same cost.

But this anti-health care argument is saying that if less people share the same cost, they will not each pay as much compared to having more people paying for the same thing.
Something fishy here........................

[badmonkey]

Well, see, I look at it like this.
Let's say there is a piece of property for sale we want to buy an we know a few more people who are interested in going in on it.
If there are 5 of us who divide up the cost, it will be more expensive for each of us compared to if there are 8 of us dividing the same cost.

But this anti-health care argument is saying that if less people share the same cost, they will not each pay as much compared to having more people paying for the same thing.
Something fishy here........................

Your analogy is completely wrong. You have to understand that:
1) You are are the one that wants to buy the property
2) I'm not interested in buying the property

If there are 5 of us dividing the cost of healthcare for 5 people it will cost us the same as if we divide the cost of healthcare for 8 people by 8 people. If there are 5 of us dividing the cost of heathcare for 5 people, it will cost LESS than if we divide the cost of healthcare for 8 people by 5 people.

[high fly]

A public option will have efficency? Think of the postal service


Good idea.
6 days a week the postal service will send someone to my door to pick up a letter, put it on a truck and take it to get it sorted, put it on a plane and then have someone else take it right up to the door of someone else who lives waywayway back in the mountains just a few days later, and all for 42 cents.

Okokokok, they ran a deficit of what, 6 billion dollars last year? Sorry, I forget what it was, but let's say it is $6 billion.
That means all last year we got postal service below cost.
I happen to like getting stuff for below cost.
And after we pay them the $6 billion difference, we will have gotten last years' service at cost.
I happen to like getting service at cost.



DAMN! that postal service cliche sure sounded good when Glenn Beck used it......

[high fly]

Your analogy is completely wrong. You have to understand that:
1) You are are the one that wants to buy the property
2) I'm not interested in buying the property

If there are 5 of us dividing the cost of healthcare for 5 people it will cost us the same as if we divide the cost of healthcare for 8 people by 8 people. If there are 5 of us dividing the cost of heathcare for 5 people, it will cost LESS than if we divide the cost of healthcare for 8 people by 5 people.


Yeah, but since the ones not paying for health care are getting it anyway at the emergency room, the rest of us are still paying for it. I say have everyone pay for it and the cost has to be less because there are more people paying for the same thing.
My analogy is only wrong when you change the premise in order for you to debate your reconstituted argument instead of the one that was actually put forth.
If I wanted, I could restate your argument and change what you said to suit me, but that wouldn't be fair, would it?

[badmonkey]

Yeah, but since the ones not paying for health care are getting it anyway at the emergency room, the rest of us are still paying for it. I say have everyone pay for it and the cost has to be less because there are more people paying for the same thing.
My analogy is only wrong when you change the premise in order for you to debate your reconstituted argument instead of the one that was actually put forth.
If I wanted, I could restate your argument and change what you said to suit me, but that wouldn't be fair, would it?

Wrong. Your analogy says if "we" want to buy a piece of property and we know some other people that want in, we can divide the price of the property and get it cheaper. Your analogy pretends that the "cost of healthcare" is some static number that stays the same regardless of how many people you add to the system. Here... let's take your analogy:

"Let's say there is a piece of property for sale we want to buy an we know a few more people who are interested in going in on it.
If there are 5 of us who divide up the cost, it will be more expensive for each of us compared to if there are 8 of us dividing the same cost."

We don't know how big the piece of property is so let's just say it's 1 acre. Now that 8 of you have purchased the property, you each own 1/8th of an acre of land. If get 10 people to buy the land with you, you each end up owning 1/10th of the acre of land. Your piece of the land gets smaller with each person that you bring in to divide the cost. You could probably bring down the cost pretty good if you brought in 100 people, but at that point owning 1/100th of an acre of land is kind of pointless.

Still like your analogy?

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Good idea.
6 days a week the postal service will send someone to my door to pick up a letter, put it on a truck and take it to get it sorted, put it on a plane and then have someone else take it right up to the door of someone else who lives waywayway back in the mountains just a few days later, and all for 42 cents.

Okokokok, they ran a deficit of what, 6 billion dollars last year? Sorry, I forget what it was, but let's say it is $6 billion.
That means all last year we got postal service below cost.
I happen to like getting stuff for below cost.
And after we pay them the $6 billion difference, we will have gotten last years' service at cost.
I happen to like getting service at cost.



DAMN! that postal service cliche sure sounded good when Glenn Beck used it......

What Bob Impact said
So you support failed Business models then. ?

Some people were happy that they got a brand new Chevy and $4500 in another failure of a government program. It looks nice, it has onstar and XM Radio. Sure thats fine but the company is owned by the taxpayer and still flat on its back

[badmonkey]

Good idea.
6 days a week the postal service will send someone to my door to pick up a letter, put it on a truck and take it to get it sorted, put it on a plane and then have someone else take it right up to the door of someone else who lives waywayway back in the mountains just a few days later, and all for 42 cents.

Okokokok, they ran a deficit of what, 6 billion dollars last year? Sorry, I forget what it was, but let's say it is $6 billion.
That means all last year we got postal service below cost.
I happen to like getting stuff for below cost.
And after we pay them the $6 billion difference, we will have gotten last years' service at cost.
I happen to like getting service at cost.



DAMN! that postal service cliche sure sounded good when Glenn Beck used it......

Where do we get the $6 billion to pay the "difference"? You're getting a service at below cost, but subsidizing it with your taxes. If you don't use the postal service at all, but your taxes are paying for the $6 billion difference are you still getting a good deal? What you seem to like is when other people subsidize your lifestyle because it allows you to get service for free or below cost. You should stay away from analogies.

[Bob Impact]

Where do we get the $6 billion to pay the "difference"? You're getting a service at below cost, but subsidizing it with your taxes. If you don't use the postal service at all, but your taxes are paying for the $6 billion difference are you still getting a good deal? What you seem to like is when other people subsidize your lifestyle because it allows you to get service for free or below cost. You should stay away from analogies.

No no, you see, it's EVERYONE's money, which really means it's NOBODY's money. Silly Badmonkey.

[Syd]

Where do we get the $6 billion to pay the "difference"? You're getting a service at below cost, but subsidizing it with your taxes. If you don't use the postal service at all, but your taxes are paying for the $6 billion difference are you still getting a good deal? What you seem to like is when other people subsidize your lifestyle because it allows you to get service for free or below cost. You should stay away from analogies.

The USPS hasn't received taxpayer funding in over two decades.

[badmonkey]

The USPS hasn't received taxpayer funding in over two decades.

Is that because they've managed to find a successful business model like UPS and FedEx, etc? When the public health care option runs a deficit, will they be getting a taxpayer bailout or reducing medical services? Will that be a good deal for us too?

[badmonkey]

No no, you see, it's EVERYONE's money, which really means it's NOBODY's money. Silly Badmonkey.

You can't fool me. Everybody knows that the money comes from Obama's stash.

[SonOfSmeagol]

Some people were happy that they got a brand new Chevy and $4500 in another failure of a government program. It looks nice, it has onstar and XM Radio. Sure thats fine but the company is owned by the taxpayer and still flat on its back

Not to mention the cost per clunker. This gov't program speaks for itself:

Cash for Clunkers Results Finally In: Taxpayers Paid $24,000 per Vehicle Sold, Reports Edmunds.com (http://www.edmunds.com/help/about/press/159446/article.html)

[high fly]

Wrong. Your analogy says if "we" want to buy a piece of property and we know some other people that want in, we can divide the price of the property and get it cheaper. Your analogy pretends that the "cost of healthcare" is some static number that stays the same regardless of how many people you add to the system. Here... let's take your analogy:

"Let's say there is a piece of property for sale we want to buy an we know a few more people who are interested in going in on it.
If there are 5 of us who divide up the cost, it will be more expensive for each of us compared to if there are 8 of us dividing the same cost."

We don't know how big the piece of property is so let's just say it's 1 acre. Now that 8 of you have purchased the property, you each own 1/8th of an acre of land. If get 10 people to buy the land with you, you each end up owning 1/10th of the acre of land. Your piece of the land gets smaller with each person that you bring in to divide the cost. You could probably bring down the cost pretty good if you brought in 100 people, but at that point owning 1/100th of an acre of land is kind of pointless.

Still like your analogy?

Yeah, because once again you have to change it in order to debate it.

Right now, without the bill being passed, some are paying for all.
Therefore, to use the example you used, no ones share of the property would be reduced because we are not talking about a future division of the property, we are talking about how it is already divided now.
It's as if you have 50 people living in a co-op that owns an apartment building and only 40 of them are paying rent and it is enough to pay the note on the building.
If everyone pays rent, then the cost would be less for all.

It's more people paying for the same thing.

[high fly]

Originally Posted by high fly
Good idea.
6 days a week the postal service will send someone to my door to pick up a letter, put it on a truck and take it to get it sorted, put it on a plane and then have someone else take it right up to the door of someone else who lives waywayway back in the mountains just a few days later, and all for 42 cents.

Okokokok, they ran a deficit of what, 6 billion dollars last year? Sorry, I forget what it was, but let's say it is $6 billion.
That means all last year we got postal service below cost.
I happen to like getting stuff for below cost.
And after we pay them the $6 billion difference, we will have gotten last years' service at cost.
I happen to like getting service at cost.



DAMN! that postal service cliche sure sounded good when Glenn Beck used it......

What Bob Impact said



What Bob Impact said
So you support failed Business models then. ?




It is not a failure at all because I am getting just what I pay for, at cost.
Actually, I am getting the service below cost and get to wait a year before having to make up the difference.
Please tell me why you want to pay more for the same thing.....

[badmonkey]

Yeah, because once again you have to change it in order to debate it.

Right now, without the bill being passed, some are paying for all.
Therefore, to use the example you used, no ones share of the property would be reduced because we are not talking about a future division of the property, we are talking about how it is already divided now.
It's as if you have 50 people living in a co-op that owns an apartment building and only 40 of them are paying rent and it is enough to pay the note on the building.
If everyone pays rent, then the cost would be less for all.

It's more people paying for the same thing.

I didn't change anything. I went right along with your dumbass premise of a piece of land and 8 people buying it and more people paying for it reduces the cost. You only want to talk about he reduction in cost. You don't want to talk about the reduction in benefit. The co-op analogy is a little bit closer, but still doesn't work because you've implied that people that living in the co-op but aren't paying now would start paying and reduce the burden for everybody. The fact is that you would have to add people from outside the co-op to pay the rent to ease the burden on the people already either paying in or receiving free services from the co-op. Those people wouldn't benefit from paying extra money without receiving services from the co-op, which would reduce the services available to the people that are there now.

You really do suck at this.

[badmonkey]

It is not a failure at all because I am getting just what I pay for, at cost.
Actually, I am getting the service below cost and get to wait a year before having to make up the difference.
Please tell me why you want to pay more for the same thing.....

How are you getting it "below cost" if you have to make up the difference next year? You probably think that you're getting things for free when you buy on credit with the no payments for 12 months deals too don't you?

[WRESTLINGFAN]

So in order to get the Swine Flu vaccine you need to work on Wall St

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091106/hl_afp/healthfluuspoliticsfinancevaccine_20091106002527

[high fly]

I didn't change anything. I went right along with your dumbass premise of a piece of land and 8 people buying it and more people paying for it reduces the cost. You only want to talk about he reduction in cost. You don't want to talk about the reduction in benefit.


There is no reduction in benefit because they'd get what they have already. The only difference is the ones not paying for it would have to.
This is a major reason other countries pay less than us - more people pay for the same thing rather than just some of them....

[high fly]

How are you getting it "below cost" if you have to make up the difference next year? You probably think that you're getting things for free when you buy on credit with the no payments for 12 months deals too don't you?


The reason I say we get the service below cost is because we don't have to make up the difference until later. So, until the time we pay to get it to break even, we are paying a reduced rate.
At worst I get the service at cost.
I like getting things at cost.
Go ahead, tell me why you'd rather pay more for something you could get for less.

[Serpico1103]

So in order to get the Swine Flu vaccine you need to work on Wall St

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091106/hl_afp/healthfluuspoliticsfinancevaccine_20091106002527

Jezo, did you read the article?
It specifically said that Wall St was not getting preferential treatment.

[badmonkey]

There is no reduction in benefit because they'd get what they have already. The only difference is the ones not paying for it would have to.
This is a major reason other countries pay less than us - more people pay for the same thing rather than just some of them....

Is that the ones not paying for but currently benefiting from the system or the ones that are not paying for or benefiting from the system?

There's 3 people involved here.
A) People who pay for health care and receive health care via insurance or cash
B) People who receive health care and do not pay for it at all
C) People who do not pay for or receive health care at all.

What does group C get besides a reduction in spending money?

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Jezo, did you read the article?
It specifically said that Wall St was not getting preferential treatment.

Well all the big banks got some vaccines, the smaller brokerage houses and asset managers got nothing

[IMSlacker]

What does group C get besides a reduction in spending money?

Health insurance.

[IMSlacker]

Well all the big banks got some vaccines, the smaller brokerage houses and asset managers got nothing

Do the smaller brokerage houses and asset mangers have their own in-house medical clinics?

[Suspect Chin]

Watch Sick Around the World on PBS if you get the chance. The host visits several countries around the world and compares their systems to ours. Very enlightening.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Do the smaller brokerage houses and asset mangers have their own in-house medical clinics?

Probably not, but then again the smaller firms arent cozy with Washington Bank Lobbyists and politicians

[Serpico1103]

Probably not, but then again the smaller firms arent cozy with Washington Bank Lobbyists and politicians

You are entering board character territory.
Do you think that the gov't asked the large banks if they had in-house clinics, and then wrote the criteria based on their answers?
Please tone down your paranoia.
Your transformation will be complete when you start with FEMA camps and calling Nazis socialists.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

You are entering board character territory.
Do you think that the gov't asked the large banks if they had in-house clinics, and then wrote the criteria based on their answers?
Please tone down your paranoia.
Your transformation will be complete when you start with FEMA camps and calling Nazis socialists.

Its not paranoia, you clearly dont know how this works

Many of these big banks donated big time cash to these politcians. so of course they will get vaccines, its called payback for donating to their campaigns

[angrymissy]

I work for a Fortune 100 Company, straight up 100% slimy corporate (but not a bank or anything to do with Wall Street), and they offered the vaccine to EVERYONE, including the people in shipping and the people working the manufacturing line.

We have an in-house clinic and they offer vaccinations every year.

They don't want the flu spreading through the office and everyone calling out sick.

[Serpico1103]

Its not paranoia, you clearly dont know how this works

Many of these big banks donated big time cash to these politcians. so of course they will get vaccines, its called payback for donating to their campaigns

You are making a huge leap.

"Banks, as well as two universities in New York, were allowed to make orders because they had their own health clinics and there was enough vaccine to go round, city health spokeswoman Jessica Scaperotti told AFP.

Vaccines will not be given just to any employee, but those falling into official at-risk categories, for example, pregnant women, health care workers, and people with chronic medical conditions, Scaperotti said."

So, the banks bribed the government to ensure that universities and pregnant woman would get vaccines?
Yeah, makes sense to me.

[angrymissy]

I don't understand this swine flu shot shortage deal... I was traveling for business last week and they were offering H1N1 shots right at the airport for like, $30. I shit you not, right at the terminal.

[Serpico1103]

I don't understand this swine flu shot shortage deal... I was traveling for business last week and they were offering H1N1 shots right at the airport for like, $30. I shit you not, right at the terminal.

The airports bribed the government. At least thats what I heard at the gym.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

You are making a huge leap.

"Banks, as well as two universities in New York, were allowed to make orders because they had their own health clinics and there was enough vaccine to go round, city health spokeswoman Jessica Scaperotti told AFP.

Vaccines will not be given just to any employee, but those falling into official at-risk categories, for example, pregnant women, health care workers, and people with chronic medical conditions, Scaperotti said."

So, the banks bribed the government to ensure that universities and pregnant woman would get vaccines?
Yeah, makes sense to me.

Wow I didnt know only pregnant women worked for Goldman and Citigroup Big leap on your part

Must be great for the newborns especially ones born this year with those big bonuses Christmas is going to be great for them

[Serpico1103]

Wow I didnt know only pregnant women worked for Goldman and Citigroup Big leap on your part

I was pointing out that your own source contradicts your conclusion.
If the banks did "bribe" the government why would they want universities and only the at-risk people vaccinated; pregnant, chronically ill, and health care workers.

Read past the headlines.
Wall street isn't getting any preferential treatment.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

I was pointing out that your own source contradicts your conclusion.
If the banks did "bribe" the government why would they want universities and only the at-risk people vaccinated; pregnant, chronically ill, and health care workers.

Read past the headlines.
Wall street isn't getting any preferential treatment.

More vaccines should be going to the universities and hospitals. People working on Wall St who are at risk can afford to pay for their vaccines

[Serpico1103]

More vaccines should be going to the universities and hospitals. People working on Wall St who are at risk can afford to pay for their vaccines

I think you are missing the point.

The banks and many other corporations are HELPING by distributing the vaccine to people at-risk.
I know you would like to think that some 40 year old healthy guy smoking a cigar is shooting himself up with unnecessary vaccines while laughing at the thought of children dying because they can not get the vaccine.
Unfortunately, for your position, this is not the case.
The banks are acting as a distribution site. They have clinics that can distribute the vaccine. This helps everyone.
The article is about how people overreacted when they heard about the vaccine distribution. Not about evil banks in bed with the government.

[TheMojoPin]

WF is pro vaccine-panel.

[underdog]

I work for a Fortune 100 Company, straight up 100% slimy corporate (but not a bank or anything to do with Wall Street), and they offered the vaccine to EVERYONE, including the people in shipping and the people working the manufacturing line.

We have an in-house clinic and they offer vaccinations every year.

They don't want the flu spreading through the office and everyone calling out sick.

Yeah, my company brought in a nurse to administer free shots for our NJ and Manhattan locations, and offered to pay for anyone's shots up in our Mass location.

[Serpico1103]

WF is pro vaccine-panel.

I think he is pro-left wing conspiracy; e.g. Obama is ushering in the Fourth Reich.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

I think he is pro-left wing conspiracy; e.g. Obama is ushering in the Fourth Reich.

Wrong administration. Clinton had a Reich

http://www.pbs.org/now/news/images/Robert-Reich.jpg

[Serpico1103]

Wrong administration. Clinton had a Reich

http://www.pbs.org/now/news/images/Robert-Reich.jpg

I just got a email stating that NYC is offering free vaccines to anyone under 24, it previously was under 18, or with an underlying health condition.
I wonder who the 18 to 23 year olds bribed to get these vaccines.

[Misteriosa]

I just got a email stating that NYC is offering free vaccines to anyone under 24, it previously was under 18, or with an underlying health condition.
I wonder who the 18 to 23 year olds bribed to get these vaccines.

i think its because the cdc has been saying that the swine flu has been more lethal for that age range. since there are quite a few 18-24 yr olds uninsured, this is a good move.

[high fly]

I don't understand this swine flu shot shortage deal... I was traveling for business last week and they were offering H1N1 shots right at the airport for like, $30. I shit you not, right at the terminal.


It's so cheap cuz they stepped all over it and all you're getting is, like, 80% Mannitol....

[SonOfSmeagol]

Health 'Reform' Gets a Failing Grade - The changes proposed by Congress will require more draconian measures down the road. Just look at Massachusetts. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704431804574539581994054014.html?m od=rss_Today%27s_Most_Popular)

“Instead of forthrightly dealing with the fundamental problems, discussion is dominated by rival factions struggling to enact or defeat President Barack Obama's agenda.” "...there are no provisions to substantively control the growth of costs or raise the quality of care"

NO SHIT!

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Lets see if Mary Landrieu is a cheap date

http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20091119/articles/911199893

[Syd]

Health 'Reform' Gets a Failing Grade - The changes proposed by Congress will require more draconian measures down the road. Just look at Massachusetts. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704431804574539581994054014.html?m od=rss_Today%27s_Most_Popular)

“Instead of forthrightly dealing with the fundamental problems, discussion is dominated by rival factions struggling to enact or defeat President Barack Obama's agenda.” "...there are no provisions to substantively control the growth of costs or raise the quality of care"

NO SHIT!

Nail on the head. It's neither a conservative nor a liberal proposition for reform, its reform based on what insurance companies want to become more profitable.

[sr71blackbird]

I had an epiphany last night about this subject :
let's imagine that our own Military is it's own country, right?
It has it's own land (bases) and leader (chairman of fhe joint cheifs) and this country's citizens all have access to massive firepower and fighting equipment and all are trained to kick ass.
These citizens would be provided the absolute best insurance and medical care imaginable, right?

Hey, anyone know the way to Walter Reed Medical Center?

[epo]

Its officially going to the Senate floor. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/health/policy/22health.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&src=igw)

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Mary Landrieu is officially a cheap date, I cant believe it took only 100mm to politically whore herself out

[hanso]

Government already picks up the tab for most health care. Reform would just be cutting out the middle man.

[Contra]

Sorry Ted, no tribute for you.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul

[Ritalin]

Fuck them all hard. None of this will keep
my insurance bills from going up in 10 percent chunks.

Fuck them all.

[KatPw]

I agree with Ritalin. Fuck them all.
And if the mandate goes through without a public option I'm pretty much fucked. I can't afford to buy insurance on my own as it is.

[underdog]

I agree with Ritalin. Fuck them all.
And if the mandate goes through without a public option I'm pretty much fucked. I can't afford to buy insurance on my own as it is.

That's America, mother fucker! Love it or leave it! If you're too poor to afford health insurance, fuck you!

[KatPw]

That's America, mother fucker! Love it or leave it! If you're too poor to afford health insurance, fuck you!

My husband wants to leave it badly. I don't want to leave, all my shit's here.

[Contra]

I'm ok with my insurance, but my boss pays out the ass for health insurance for his family (4 kids). He was really looking forward to a public option.

[Ritalin]

I'm ok with my insurance, but my boss pays out the ass for health insurance for his family (4 kids). He was really looking forward to a public option.

yeah, so was I. The problem is that there isn't any option between too
much insurance - which is what we're all paying for - or no insurance. We
needed the public option to leverage the insurance industry.

Unfortunately, they own our Congress, so we never have a chance. Fuck them
all hard.

[KatPw]

yeah, so was I. The problem is that there isn't any option between too
much insurance - which is what we're all paying for - or no insurance. We
needed the public option to leverage the insurance industry.

Unfortunately, they own our Congress, so we never have a chance. Fuck them
all hard.
Don't vote for incumbents. And write to your Senators and let them know you will not vote for them again without this.

[epo]

Harry Reid is a complete pussy.

[Contra]

Damn my first DEAD! thread and it gets merged.

[A.J.]

Harry Reid is a complete pussy.

Lieberman will save the Dems. You'll see!

[epo]

Feingold Says No Support For Plans That Would 'Replace' Public Option With 'Private Approach' (http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/feingold-says-no-support-for-plans-that-would-replace-public-option-with-private-approach.php?ref=mp)

While I appreciate the willingness of all parties to engage in good-faith discussions, I do not support proposals that would replace the public option in the bill with a purely private approach. We need to have some competition for the insurance industry to keep rates down and save taxpayer dollars.

God damn right.

[boosterp]

That's America, mother fucker! Love it or leave it! If you're too poor to afford health insurance, fuck you!

Damn straight! If not for the VA I'd be living in Canada right now.

[Syd]

Feingold Says No Support For Plans That Would 'Replace' Public Option With 'Private Approach' (http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/feingold-says-no-support-for-plans-that-would-replace-public-option-with-private-approach.php?ref=mp)



God damn right.

yeah I honestly think at this point they're going to lose a good deal of progressive support and miss their mark

[Dude!]

Damn straight! If not for the VA I'd be living in Canada right now.

that's just sad
moving from one dole
to another

[KatPw]

that's just sad
moving from one dole
to another

So a man that served his country and was also injured serving this country is "on the dole"? Seriously, think about what you are saying and find the first Veteran you can and apologize.
ETA: And Canadians pay into the system. It's not "the Dole".

[tanless1]

...what's that canadian tax rate again ?

[KatPw]

...what's that canadian tax rate again ?

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/fq/txrts-eng.html

Looks like 15% on the first $40,727 of taxable income and goes up from there.
ETA: That is for Canadian Federal taxes. Scroll down for the tax rates of the Provinces.

[Ritalin]

So a man that served his country and was also injured serving this country is "on the dole"? Seriously, think about what you are saying and find the first Veteran you can and apologize.
ETA: And Canadians pay into the system. It's not "the Dole".

Fucking A right, Kat.

[boosterp]

that's just sad
moving from one dole
to another

So a man that served his country and was also injured serving this country is "on the dole"? Seriously, think about what you are saying and find the first Veteran you can and apologize.
ETA: And Canadians pay into the system. It's not "the Dole".

Fucking A right, Kat.

Thank you Kat and Ritalin. Dude you can go fuck yourself, are you a veteran? Are any of your family members veterans? If so you need to tell your veteran family member that they suck and you should not support them. I paid physically and mentally for my benefits.

[Dude!]

I paid physically and mentally for my benefits.

i respect that 100%
and i did not mean to say
that that the miltary benefits
are not earned

what i objected to
was the attitude that
'if i weren't getting money in the US
i would move to a place that would
give me something'

[KatPw]

Who is asking for the government to give them money? All I'm asking for is a fair and reasonable way to obtain medical coverage. How much do you pay for your insurance a month? Last time I got a quote it was $1,000 per month for me. Do you pay that much a month or are you one of the fortunate who obtains their health coverage through your job? I do not have the buying power of a corporation behind me. I'm an employed person that cannot obtain coverage short of prostituting myself to pay for it and that is not exactly the career path I want to take. Although if I'm arrested and put in jail for whoring myself out I would get medical coverage.

[boosterp]

what i objected to
was the attitude that
'if i weren't getting money in the US
i would move to a place that would
give me something'

Right now I am retired, I had to resign from a high paying well respected job a year and a half ago due to my veteran issues catching up to me and hindering my job performance and pissing off my managers. I live on a very limited income (pension from the Army) , so hell yea I would go to where I could live cheaper if not for the benefits I receive. My medication would cost me over $200 a month with great medical insurance if not for the VA. Hence why I am offended by your statement.

[angrymissy]

that's just sad
moving from one dole
to another

Even more sad
that you call someone
who served this nation
living on the dole
and sad

[tanless1]

I do believe that the govt is intentionaly'not instituting solutions so that they can sieze sector. Why is there not the ability to purchase out of state ? That could easily be solved w/o 2000 pages....
....but medicare is failing. The only way they can save it is w/money they don't have. So inflate to crisis level to cover your failures....its just a bad idea. There are easier ways. I forsee an overall tax rate of 70% + then between kilo decision and foreseeable foreclosure rates we will all be living in govt housing. Sure it'll still be our home sorta...but . As in canada , its all the queenns land and you get to lease it.
......baby steps, we'll have a dictatorship yet.

[underdog]

I do believe that the govt is intentionaly'not instituting solutions so that they can sieze sector. Why is there not the ability to purchase out of state ? That could easily be solved w/o 2000 pages....
....but medicare is failing. The only way they can save it is w/money they don't have. So inflate to crisis level to cover your failures....its just a bad idea. There are easier ways. I forsee an overall tax rate of 70% + then between kilo decision and foreseeable foreclosure rates we will all be living in govt housing. Sure it'll still be our home sorta...but . As in canada , its all the queenns land and you get to lease it.
......baby steps, we'll have a dictatorship yet.

Exactly.

[Dude!]

Even more sad
that you call someone
who served this nation
living on the dole
and sad

you're just mad cause
i called you out on your
on-camera open-mouth
trough-eating!

[KatPw]

Tanless, people own homes in Canada. It's not the Queens land. And with imminent domain is any land in the US really yours to own? It seems like if a corporation wants it they can take it.

[Contra]

Tanless, people own homes in Canada. It's not the Queens land. And with imminent domain is any land in the US really yours to own? It seems like if a corporation wants it they can take it.

Yeah it's not so much the land of the free as the land of fuck you pay me!

[booster11373]

Yeah it's not so much the land of the free as the land of fuck you pay me!

Did you into business with Pauli Cisero?

[angrymissy]

you're just mad cause
i called you out on your
on-camera open-mouth
trough-eating!

I
was
STARVING!

(I hate Paltalk)

[Contra]

Did you into business with Pauli Cisero?

We all have, its called the US government.

[Ritalin]

Me to Joe Lieberman: Drop Dead.

[epo]

Me to Joe Lieberman: Drop Dead.

I've said that for a long time. (http://www.ronfez.net/forums/showthread.php?t=60347)

[Dude!]

I've said that for a long time. (http://www.ronfez.net/forums/showthread.php?t=60347)

no, you never said
"Me to Joe Lieberman: Drop Dead"

that's a lie

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Howard Dean says scrap it !!!!



http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/12/15/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5983608.shtml

[Syd]

long story short:

hope you die quickly and don't have a chance to realize how fucked we are by healthcare "reform"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/16/AR2009121603639.html?hpid=topnews

huge reduction in states rights in one of the most ridiculous republican (lowercase R) power grabs since the Civil War

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Queef Olberdouche says, throw him in jail


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34455168/ns/msnbc_tv-countdown_with_keith_olbermann

[foodcourtdruide]

Queef Olberdouche says, throw him in jail


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34455168/ns/msnbc_tv-countdown_with_keith_olbermann

That's some typo!

[SonOfSmeagol]

This whole thing has now truly shown its colors as a huge cluster fucking political nightmare. No surprise there. But get it done by Christmas and it'll all be ok. Quite ironic that the left sees Jesus as the light at the end of the tunnel.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Looks like it wont get passed at least in the Senate as they are packing up and headed home for Break. Hopefully Schumer doesnt mouth off at any more flight attendants

[keithy_19]

That's some typo!

I lold.

[KatPw]

Looks like it wont get passed at least in the Senate as they are packing up and headed home for Break. Hopefully Schumer doesnt mouth off at any more flight attendants

I thought that was hilarious. I'd call her a fucking cunt too. In fact I called several people that at the mall today.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

I thought that was hilarious. I'd call her a fucking cunt too. In fact I called several people that at the mall today.

Fuck that lowlife sleazebag cuntmuscle Schumer, he's been a cancer his entire life, just a parasite leeching off the taxpayer for the past 35 years, as that jerkoff never worked an honest day in his life

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Stay the fuck out of my State Michael Moore, keep your fat ass in Michigan


http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/ci_14019028

[keithy_19]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/19/AR2009121900797_pf.html

Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.), the final Democratic holdout on health care, announced to his colleagues Saturday morning that he would support the Senate reform bill, clearing the way for final passage by Christmas of President Obama's top domestic policy priority.

Nelson secured full federal funding for his state to expand Medicaid coverage to all individuals below 133 percent of the federal poverty level. Other states must pay a small portion of the additional cost. He won concessions for qualifying nonprofit insurers and for Medigap providers from a new insurance tax, and was able to roll back cuts to health savings accounts.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Dems love Lieberman and Nelson again

[epo]

Dems love Lieberman and Nelson again

I don't care about Nelson and I'll never like Lieberman.

[Dude!]

I don't care about Nelson and I'll never like Lieberman.

y'all have made the insurance companies
very happy

nice job

[Syd]

fuck the liberals for kowtowing to the insurance companies

[Recyclerz]

Uh oh, the Democrats may be in danger of losing the gui-..., um make that the "Jersey Shore" visitor vote.

Tanning tax to help pay for health reform (http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200912191812DOWJONESDJONLINE000332_FORTUNE5.htm)


& to all my liberal peeps, with all due respect, please stop whining about the insurance companies "winning" this process. The goal of putting the private insurance companies out of business with government programs was always a glass pipe dream of the irrational Left. The details of this legislative process in Congress may be ugly but that's the way our system is supposed to work - different groups fighting over their parochial interests and coming out with a compromise that most can live with even if they're not happy about it. There are enough restrictions on the current egregious insurance company practices to make our health care system better, maybe significantly better. Let's take what we can get now so that we can keep a coalition together to isolate the irrational Right and keep them away from the levers of power. We can fix the remaining problems in the future when most folks have realized the positive effects of what is in this program.

[Syd]

Single payer wasn't going to happen after all the money they dumped into the process early to corrupt the public and spread propaganda. The point was to make reform not massive corporate welfare -- which is why the insurance companies won.

[Ritalin]

Uh oh, the Democrats may be in danger of losing the gui-..., um make that the "Jersey Shore" visitor vote.

Tanning tax to help pay for health reform (http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200912191812DOWJONESDJONLINE000332_FORTUNE5.htm)


& to all my liberal peeps, with all due respect, please stop whining about the insurance companies "winning" this process. The goal of putting the private insurance companies out of business with government programs was always a glass pipe dream of the irrational Left. The details of this legislative process in Congress may be ugly but that's the way our system is supposed to work - different groups fighting over their parochial interests and coming out with a compromise that most can live with even if they're not happy about it. There are enough restrictions on the current egregious insurance company practices to make our health care system better, maybe significantly better. Let's take what we can get now so that we can keep a coalition together to isolate the irrational Right and keep them away from the levers of power. We can fix the remaining problems in the future when most folks have realized the positive effects of what is in this program.

Hold on. This bill doesn't allow for the reimportation of drugs - in fact Pharma sashayed over to the White House and negotiated it's own deal.

The bill mandates coverage and supplies people who can't afford coverage a subsidy. I own a business, and I'd love for the government to require everybody to buy my service, and give them money to do so if they can't afford it. All that, AND I get to charge whatever I want in a market rigged against competition?

I'd say I made out pretty good in that deal.

[Recyclerz]

Hold on. This bill doesn't allow for the reimportation of drugs - in fact Pharma sashayed over to the White House and negotiated it's own deal.

The bill mandates coverage and supplies people who can't afford coverage a subsidy. I own a business, and I'd love for the government to require everybody to buy my service, and give them money to do so if they can't afford it. All that, AND I get to charge whatever I want in a market rigged against competition?

I'd say I made out pretty good in that deal.

The importation of drugs from other countries is an illusory way to save money. The drugs are cheaper in other industrial countries because their governments manned up and negotiated deals with the pharmas for set rates. Pharma knows what the current demand for their products is in each of these countries and if demand in any one of them spikes because their distributors are selling back into the US I can guarantee that they will go to that country and cut off the new supply. Are any of these countries going to have their own people go without the cheaper drugs because the US is hoovering them up instead? I doubt it. I get paid by a big pharma co. so I see this stuff close up.

The bill does mandate that people buy the insurance but it also places restrictions on the way that the insurance cos. operate. One of the biggest features is that it mandates that the companies doing business in the exchanges (which will probably be all of 'em after some consolidation) pay out 80 to 85% of their revenues in medical costs (ie. services to their customers) leaving them with more revenues but lower profit margins. If the insurance companies don't play nice, the gov't. will be able to regulate them like they do to the utility companies, leaving them as private companies but with their pricing power limited by the government. So if they want to be more profitable they'll have to innovate with services that more customers will want, which is a good market based solution, rather than the current system which ass rapes any customers that aren't protected by working for huge employers with bargaining power. I don't see it as a giveaway at all.

[GregoryJoseph]

I guess Big Brother can tell us what we can and can't eat now, huh?

[epo]

I guess Big Brother can tell us what we can and can't eat now, huh?

Look what happened to you on the old diet!

[SonOfSmeagol]

After the initial Christmas glee wears off, it'll be fun watching the Dems try to polish this turd in the coming months.

[Syd]

After the initial Christmas glee wears off, it'll be fun watching the Dems try to polish this turd in the coming months.

Will be easy with their shitloads of health insurance lobby money

[epo]

I'm watching Senator Lamar Alexander cry about not being able to watch the football game and having to deal with a snowstorm....while having to read a bill this afternoon.

Poor baby had to work on a Sunday....

[keithy_19]

I'm going to ask a question that has nothing behind it. I've just noticed that with this current congress and white house that a lot of things have been getting done late at night. I know that President Obama does a lot of his work at night, quite the opposite of the previous president.

Has this happened before? Or has this happened as much as it has since this congress took hold?

[epo]

I'm going to ask a question that has nothing behind it. I've just noticed that with this current congress and white house that a lot of things have been getting done late at night. I know that President Obama does a lot of his work at night, quite the opposite of the previous president.

Has this happened before? Or has this happened as much as it has since this congress took hold?

Depends upon the President. For example, Clinton would often work until 3am.

Congress often will work late nights and weekends if the situation calls for it. However they would much prefer to work banker's hours.

[A.J.]

Depends upon the President. For example, Clinton would often work until 3am.

Sometimes not on interns!

[A.J.]

I guess Big Brother can tell us what we can and can't eat now, huh?

That's the result of them telling us what and where we can't smoke.

[west milly Tom]

I'm just glad the wonderful citizens of Nebraska will be getting their Medicade payed by the taxpayers from everywhere but Nebraska. Ben Nelson sold his soul.

[topless_mike]

I know that President Obama does a lot of his work at night, quite the opposite of the previous president.


have you ever known "them" to get up in the morning?

j/k. saw the low hanging fruit, and i was hungry.

carry on.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

I'm just glad the wonderful citizens of Nebraska will be getting their Medicade payed by the taxpayers from everywhere but Nebraska. Ben Nelson sold his soul.

These bluedogs should be called lapdogs

[keithy_19]

These bluedogs should be called lapdogs

I had a lapdog once. Bit my throat and peed on me.

Sadly, nothing else turns me on anymore..

[Dude!]

it looks like there will be
some major blowback
from the nebraska thing

[west milly Tom]

it looks like there will be
some major blowback
from the nebraska thing

How so? I could be wrong but I don't even think Nelson is up in 2110. What's done is done.

[Dude!]

How so? I could be wrong but I don't even think Nelson is up in 2110. What's done is done.

no, not the election
the fact that the senators
who DIDN'T ask for things
are now lining up
because they look like fools

and because the regular
hardworking americans...
white americans....
are ticked off that their
tax dollars are going to give
people of one state a free ride

obama and the dems were supposed
to have a new, trasparent style of politics
and they are just same-old same-old

the polls on health care continue to slide
there will be major blowback on this thing
trust me

[west milly Tom]

no, not the election
the fact that the senators
who DIDN'T ask for things
are now lining up
because they look like fools

and because the regular
hardworking americans...
white americans....
are ticked off that their
tax dollars are going to give
people of one state a free ride

obama and the dems were supposed
to have a new, trasparent style of politics
and they are just same-old same-old

the polls on health care continue to slide
there will be major blowback on this thing
trust me


If my blowback you mean bend over and take it then yes there will be a lot of that. The house is certainly up for grabs and yes people are pissed but they haven't reached any sort of breaking point yet. That may happen during reconciliation or when we reach the amnesty process which is coming up next. Remember when Obama said he would televise the health care debate/process? This bill is just the "Starter House".

Luckily Obama and the democrats have blown through their last ounce of political capitol. Cap and Trade is dead. Obama gets laughed out of Copenhagen. Russia launches a nuclear test while Obama accepts the Nobel Prize. China gets caught allowing NK to fly arms to Iran through their airspace.

I just hope the voters can stop the hemorrhaging.

[Syd]

Why do you think anything particular will change, Democrat or Republican? Tossing out a Democrat is just going to bring in a Republican who will be bought and paid for by the same corporations that bought and paid for the Democrat. There's no point cheering for anyone come 2010 elections.

[Syd]

Furthermore...what does the failed Russian ICBM launch have to do with anything? We can't go enter in another spending war with them nor do we have any ability to exert influence over them. Are we supposed to get all pissed off and bomb anyone the second they upgrade their nuclear weapons?

[epo]

Luckily Obama and the democrats have blown through their last ounce of political capitol.

So a President, with a Senate & House in the same party has no political capital? I just want to point this out so that we may laugh at your lack of understanding on how Washington works.

[SonOfSmeagol]

I just want to laugh at both you as you use the word "capitol".

http://www.cppa-dc.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/300px-US_Capitol_dome_Jan_2006.jpg

[Dude!]

I just want to laugh at both you as you use the word "capitol".

capital post, my good fellow

[WRESTLINGFAN]

All of our state taxes will go up to subsidize some cornhuskers, thanks to Ben Nelson whoring himself out

[epo]

All of our state taxes will go up to subsidize some cornhuskers, thanks to Ben Nelson whoring himself out

I hope yours go up double.

[badmonkey]

Paying for health care is for suckers. I'm movin' to Nebraska.