Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 115

Thread: FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root

  1. #61
    Can't stop the signal...
    theangryamerican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    07-29-13 @ 11:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,233

    Re: FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    I guess that is why GM is gearing up production
    Cash for Clunkers? That's your shining example of the success of this government? How long are you going to blindly wander around thinking that program was actually good for America?
    "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it." - Judge Learned Hand

  2. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    If you are tired of all the right-wing lies....check the facts:

    FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root - Yahoo! News

    Fact #1: [I]THE FACTS: Nothing being debated in Washington would give the government such authority. Critics have twisted a provision in a House bill that would direct Medicare to pay for counseling sessions about end-of-life care, living wills, hospices and the like if a patient wants such consultations with a doctor. They have said, incorrectly, that the elderly would be required to have these sessions.

    Fact #2 : THE FACTS: Obama is not proposing a single-payer system in which the government covers everyone, like in Canada or some European countries. He says that direction is not right for the U.S. The proposals being negotiated do not go there.

    Fact#3: THE FACTS: The House version of legislation would allow coverage for abortion in the public plan. But the procedure would be paid for with dollars from beneficiary premiums, not from federal funds. Likewise, private plans in the new insurance exchange could opt to cover abortion, but no federal subsidies would be used to pay for the procedure.
    FACT: The government is currently in a $1.8 trillion deficit with no end in sight and cannot afford to attempt a government takeover of the medical insurance in this country.

    FACT: Government managed (oxymoron if I ever saw one) programs ration care and payments to doctors in an effort to reign in costs. This causes long waiting lists and a shortage of specialists to perform critical operations and less R&D expenditures.

    FACT: Citizens who live in Government managed health care nations pay substantially more in taxes, earn less pay, pay much more for items like gas, clothes and gorceries and live a lower standard of living than most Americans do.

    One thing is certain, FACTS are not a friend of this administration.

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Its all too obvious that the group of "usual suspects" has taken a page from their dear and beloved idol GWB: "If you tell lies enough times, perhaps there are some people out there guillable enough to believe you....so repeat repeat repeat".

    How you guys can continue to lie with a straight face when the facts are right before your eyes is truly amazing.
    The denial in this one is strong padawan.

  4. #64
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root

    Quote Originally Posted by theangryamerican View Post
    Cash for Clunkers? That's your shining example of the success of this government? How long are you going to blindly wander around thinking that program was actually good for America?
    I support Americans, I support Americans going back to work, I support good deals for Americans. I'm sorry you do not feel the same.

  5. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root

    Does anyone on ANY side of this debate HONESTLY believe that the efforts of the likes of Kennedy and Obama government mandate/program would not offer/mandate illegal aliens health care? REALLY?

  6. #66
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root

    1. the irony is that if there ARE indeed any lies concerning obamacare that are being swallowed whole by large parts of the electorate, they testify to the FAILURE of the white house to get its word out, to CONTROL the discussion, to make its side heard, to SELL

    if 55% of americans believe something that isn't true, then you're looking at one LOSER of a president

    he can make excuses, he can blame, he can whine about how unfair things are

    but he's LOSING, by definition

    2. when heller was killed in ways and means, july 17, it stripped the enforcement (e-verify) out of the house bill, leaving empty any claim that illegals will NOT be included in whatever expansion of coverage goes down

    what possible argument could be forwarded AGAINST ensuring that health care recipients possess valid soc sec numbers?

  7. #67
    Can't stop the signal...
    theangryamerican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    07-29-13 @ 11:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,233

    Re: FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    I support Americans, I support Americans going back to work, I support good deals for Americans. I'm sorry you do not feel the same.
    What a coincidence, I support America and Americans who can take control of their own lives and not depend on the government to fulfill their sense of entitlement. Thank you for the sad attempt to twist my words. It’s too bad that the CARS program didn't do anything to actually help the people.

    If you actually paid attention to what was going on instead of just being dazzled by the shiny gloss on the surface, you'd realize what I'm talking about.

    Here, I'll break it down for you, since I'm feeling generous.

    First, the true "clunkers" on the road are all well over 9 years old. The people driving these cars, even with a voucher from the Feds, most likely should not even be buying a new car. They just don't have the money. That's why they're driving a clunker in the first place. Unless a person has enough disposable income to be paying for a new car in cash, they probably shouldn't be buying it.

    Besides having to commit to high monthly payments against something that they currently may have no monthly payments on, they will wind up paying more in annual fees and insurance payments. In most states, the vehicle registration fees are age and value based. My car, for example, costs about $30 this year. A new car will cost nearly $500. Additionally, a new car would probably add another $400 to $600 a year in higher insurance costs. Combined, you could be looking at a new expense of $850 to over $1000 a year that is over-and-above any monthly expenses for a new car loan.

    The average mileage on a new car is about 27 miles per gallon and that car is destined to drive about 12,000 miles a year; once off the lot. That means that this new car will probably need about 450 gallons a year to operate. For the sake of conjecture, let’s use a rate of $2.60 per gallon, making the annual fuel expense about $1170 dollars. A 4 mpg increase in a mileage rate is only a 14 percent reduction in annual fuel expenses. The resulting savings for buying that new car would be a little over $13 a month for the buyer. Not much of an incentive to spend $10,000 or more (even after the voucher) to save such a small amount of expense in gasoline.

    In addition, this isn’t even getting the inefficient vehicles off the road. Given that the average car is 9 years old, it will be repackaged by the car dealer as a used vehicle and resold. That used car will remain on the road for a very long time.

    Lastly, the biggest problems with the "Cash For Clunkers" spending bill is that it will drive consumers to buy Toyota's and Honda's. That's because, the Japanese vehicles have higher mileage capabilities than most U.S. models of the same class or type. In fact, most Japanese hybrids are at least 4 mpg more efficient than any equivalent U.S. branded hybrid. Standard fueled cars are even more efficient. That means that many new car buyers just see this as a "government give-a-way" for something that they planned to do anyway.

    If people were planning on buying a car within the last six months, hearing about the voucher, they would have held off their purchase until the program had been instated. This created an artificial slump in the car sales market that may not have been as bad as it was if people weren’t waiting on this program to save them a few bucks. In addition, the bounce back the market is seeing is likely to slow as soon as the program ends, since anyone who was planning on buying a car in the following six months bought early to take advantage of the savings. Basically, all the car purchases that had been planned for this year are already done.

    Furthermore, the reason the U.S. car sales have slipped over the years is because resale values are lower and repairs higher. If you just look at any Cadillac, two years off the showroom floor, there are constant and reoccurring problems with things like the electrical system. That's why resale values are lower and why their Japanese counterparts are more desirable. The quality and finish of a car on the showroom floor is one thing. However, the repair history is something completely different. U.S. namesakes can't compete with the Japanese after 2 or 3 years of operation. Just look at consumer reports or other rating agencies.

    Regardless, there will be almost as many “clunkers on the road after the program is over as there were before.

    So, in conclusion, you have Americans burdening themselves with debt they probably can’t afford, in a down economy, no less. They’re paying in excess of $15,000 to get a $4,500 of their own tax dollars back. They're spending MORE money each month as opposed to getting a good deal. You have jobs that have been temporarily created but will likely not last through the month. To top it all off, you really haven’t taken many of those nasty, evil, inefficient cars off the road. This just reeks of success, doesn’t it?
    "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it." - Judge Learned Hand

  8. #68
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root

    Quote Originally Posted by theangryamerican View Post
    So, in conclusion, you have Americans burdening themselves with debt they probably can’t afford, in a down economy, no less. They’re paying in excess of $15,000 to get a $4,500 of their own tax dollars back. They're spending MORE money each month as opposed to getting a good deal. You have jobs that have been temporarily created but will likely not last through the month. To top it all off, you really haven’t taken many of those nasty, evil, inefficient cars off the road. This just reeks of success, doesn’t it?
    In all fairness, your analysis is somewhat off.

    $4,500 is a fair-sized down payment on a vehicle, and it is entirely plausible a person might wish to buy a new vehicle but merely lacks that down payment. For such a person, the CARS program does not inordinately burden them with debt, but merely is an opportunity to bring forward a purchase they might otherwise have put off until next year. In fact, given the increase general in saving rates of late, it is quite probable that this represents a majority of people purchasing new vehicles through CARS. For such a person, the debt and expenditure levels are not burdensome.

    The reality is that both scenarios are, for at least some people, true. There are people who probably should not have bought a new vehicle for external economic concerns such as the ones you raised, and so CARS was not a net benefit to them, and there are those who were able to get the new vehicles they desired a few months sooner.

    Whether the program translates into an overall benefit for the economy of the nation as a whole remains to be seen.

  9. #69
    Guru
    BWG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    South Coast
    Last Seen
    12-04-17 @ 11:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,203

    Re: FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root

    Quote Originally Posted by buck
    Yes, I do.

    Do you have any proof that the 47 million uninsured don't actually count between 10 - 20 million illegal immingants?
    Your assertion. Your burden of proof.

    BTW..10-20 million is a pretty wide gap when talking about a group of people of 45 million.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    I think it's closer to 10-12, but he's correct. There was a long thread a while back where I went through the whole thing, but the CNS article actually does a surprisingly good job of describing it.
    Yes I participated in that thread and I made the same observations to you back then that I'm about to make again.

    From the CNS article that you reference (and linked to by Redress in post #51)
    But this number, according to the Census Bureau, included 9.73 million foreigners
    Notice it says foreigners, not illegals.

    One of the first arguments from those in opposition to this reform was that the number of uninsured include...*gasp*...foreigners, when clearly Obama, Pelosi, Reid, et. al. said 'Americans'. These foreigners live, work, go to school, pay taxes everyday right along with 'Americans'. We include them in everything we do, but now all of a sudden they don't count when it's politically convenient. Where are these people supposed to go when they get sick? Back to Vietnam? Brazil? Indonesia?

    From the census bureau on the uninsured
    http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p60-235.pdf

    Table 6 Page 22

    PEOPLE

    Total.................45,657

    Nativity

    Native born . . . . . 33,269
    Foreign born . . . . 12,388
    Naturalized citizen . 2,651
    Not a citizen . . . . 9,737
    If you were to make a huge assumption and said that every 'not a citizen' was an illegal it would still be short of 10-12 million, but then that would leave no room for all the other 'not a citizen' living in the United States from all the other countries in the world.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    That means that there are approximately 18 million people who make less than $75k and who do not have public insurance available to them. Of those, I would argue that many (if not the majority) can afford insurance but either consciously choose not to or spend their money foolishly.
    I addressed this also. While I agree that some can afford to buy health insurance, but for what ever reason refuse to do so. However the article made the sweeping assumption that everyone that made over X amount could afford insurance, without investigating as to the why. They may have been refused insurance because of a preexisting condition, they may have a child with an uninsurable condition, who knows. They made claims based on.....well really....nothing!
    “We just simply don’t know how to govern” - Rep. Steve Womack (R-AR) a member of the House Budget Committee

  10. #70
    Can't stop the signal...
    theangryamerican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    07-29-13 @ 11:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,233

    Re: FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    In all fairness, your analysis is somewhat off.

    $4,500 is a fair-sized down payment on a vehicle, and it is entirely plausible a person might wish to buy a new vehicle but merely lacks that down payment. For such a person, the CARS program does not inordinately burden them with debt, but merely is an opportunity to bring forward a purchase they might otherwise have put off until next year. In fact, given the increase general in saving rates of late, it is quite probable that this represents a majority of people purchasing new vehicles through CARS. For such a person, the debt and expenditure levels are not burdensome.

    The reality is that both scenarios are, for at least some people, true. There are people who probably should not have bought a new vehicle for external economic concerns such as the ones you raised, and so CARS was not a net benefit to them, and there are those who were able to get the new vehicles they desired a few months sooner.

    Whether the program translates into an overall benefit for the economy of the nation as a whole remains to be seen.
    Very true, but I didn't state that the example I gave was the case for everyone. There is an exception to every rule, but I don't think most Americans can afford to just throw away the money they are losing by thinking they are getting a good deal or saving gas money.

    For example, I just got an 8 mpg increase in my own vehicle and I didn't have to buy a new car to do it. The cost...about $40. I changed my oil, air filter and fuel filter. My car is ten years old, American and paid for and it is as reliable as anything I could drive off a car lot brand new (and it still gets 25mpg to boot.)

    If someone can't afford to pay $4,500 dollars for a downpayment, they obviously don't have the money to cover any major life emergency that might suddenly arise. What if they lose their job tomorrow? If they don't even have $4,500 available in the bank to support themselves without working, then the new car they bought just became a giant albatross around their neck. THAT was my point. If you can't pay cash, you can't afford it.
    "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it." - Judge Learned Hand

Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •