Senate OKs health care measure, reaching milestone

Dirty Harry said:

America doesn't even have a clue what the healthcare plan is. They are just thinking what they are told to think.

Click to expand...

Nobody has a clue what this health care plan is about because no one was given a chance to read it before it was shoved through! :roll:

Dirty Harry said:

I thought I better post it. You didn't seem to understand.

Click to expand...

oh, i understand, my glass house inhabiting friend

i fully appreciate:

half a T cuts to m and m

10 years of taxes vs 6 of benefits

taxing benefit packages

taxing payroll

in times like these

taxing small biz

burdening states with billions in bills, unbacked

by pen stroke

wielded in reid's locked closet

criminalizing individuals who can't, won't or don't pay to play

the bribes

the secret deal with phrma

the leverage of lobbyists all over

death to the deficit---the doc fix

the class act

etc

and most germaine HERE:

not a WORD of apology for even one of the above in this entire gaseous thread

Dirty Harry said:

So you cheated. You were leeching off the folks, paying no rent allowing you to save money that would otherwise go to paying rent.

Click to expand...

with all due respect, for anyone to intrude themselves in the relationship between a son or daughter and his or her parents strikes me as astonishingly rude

The Prof said:

with all due respect, for anyone to intrude themselves in the relationship between a son or daughter and his or her parents strikes me as astonishingly rude

Click to expand...

Rude? That's funny:lol: This is an annonomous internet forum for cryin out loud. You do know that, don't you? It's my job to make my observations and comment on others comments.

The guy was bragging that what he did was such a wonderful thing and I called him on it. I just got the whole story.

The Prof said:

oh, i understand, my glass house inhabiting friend

i fully appreciate:

half a T cuts to m and m

10 years of taxes vs 6 of benefits

taxing benefit packages

taxing payroll

in times like these

taxing small biz

burdening states with billions in bills, unbacked

by pen stroke

wielded in reid's locked closet

criminalizing individuals who can't, won't or don't pay to play

the bribes

the secret deal with phrma

the leverage of lobbyists all over

death to the deficit---the doc fix

the class act

etc

and most germaine HERE:

not a WORD of apology for even one of the above in this entire gaseous thread

Click to expand...

Why do you write like a gradeschooler? Must be another flaw in our educational system, not teaching grammar, sentence structure, the use of paragraphs and capital letters. etc.

The Prof said:

with all due respect, for anyone to intrude themselves in the relationship between a son or daughter and his or her parents strikes me as astonishingly rude

Click to expand...

not when the person who publicly espouses self sufficiency is then found to be one who does not practice it, all the while pridefully expounding on his independent successes

The Prof said:

with all due respect, for anyone to intrude themselves in the relationship between a son or daughter and his or her parents strikes me as astonishingly rude

Click to expand...

So, when the cops show up and find children chained up in their parents' basement, beaten, neglected... they are being Rude?

Prof, you've posted some ignorant statements on DP, but this one just takes the cake. How "rude" that Government protect children from bad parents?

with all due respect, you are taking out of your ass.

hazlnut said:

So, when the cops show up and find children chained up in their parents' basement, beaten, neglected... they are being Rude?

Prof, you've posted some ignorant statements on DP, but this one just takes the cake. How "rude" that Government protect children from bad parents?

with all due respect, you are taking out of your ass.

Click to expand...

With all due respect(none). This has nothing to do with the topic, the adress to the other poster, or even has any relevance whatsoever. So........maybe you should keep that to yourself. Mkay?

Ethereal said:

Living within one's means; frugality; budgetary discipline; self-control; savings.

Click to expand...

That sure was fun wasn't it? Sorry but while I agree with you, you're too idealistic on this.

Dirty Harry said:

grammar, sentence structure, the use of paragraphs and capital letters. etc.

Click to expand...

another EFFECTIVE defense of THIS BILL

LOL!

Dirty Harry said:

annonomous

Click to expand...

you mean, "anonymous"

Toothpicvic said:

That sure was fun wasn't it? Sorry but while I agree with you, you're too idealistic on this.

Click to expand...

Yea, expecting adults to have self-control and financial awareness is totally idealistic.

j-mac said:

I hope everyone has their bills paid up, or off. I hope that everyone is secure in their jobs. I hope that demos realize that as this monstrosity takes effect, and people see no change for the upcoming 4 years, other than insurance, and Pharma companies allowed to continually raise their rates, that the demos understand as they lose a lion share of power in upcoming 2010, and 2012 elections that no matter the rhetoric they brought this on themselves.

And I hope that this, along with other plans that this administration has in mind to destroy this once great nation are reversible. For my children's sake.

Merry Christmas.


j-mac

Click to expand...

God damned it. This is nothing but a play to the insurance companies (as I said from the beginning) and to the pharmaceutical companies (which was a surprise, cause they got theirs with Medicare Part D). As much as I hate government intervention, if we were going to do something like this we should have at least done it intelligently and in a way which served the People, not the aristocracy.

Ikari said:

God damned it. This is nothing but a play to the insurance companies (as I said from the beginning) and to the pharmaceutical companies (which was a surprise, cause they got theirs with Medicare Part D). As much as I hate government intervention, if we were going to do something like this we should have at least done it intelligently and in a way which served the People, not the aristocracy.

Click to expand...

I agree, and I think that this is one of the main reasons that the American people are so against this sham. Obama is so eager to proclaim success in this, that he is selling us all out for a soundbyte.


j-mac

j-mac said:

I agree, and I think that this is one of the main reasons that the American people are so against this sham. Obama is so eager to proclaim success in this, that he is selling us all out for a soundbyte.


j-mac

Click to expand...

Do you even know what is in the bill? Or what will be in the bill if it makes it through the House?
If it is that bad the democrats will be ousted in 4 years and the GOP can put everything back to where it was. If it works well the republicans will never get power again. Is that what you're really afraid of? Seems like it.

Dirty Harry said:

Do you even know what is in the bill? Or what will be in the bill if it makes it through the House?
If it is that bad the democrats will be ousted in 4 years and the GOP can put everything back to where it was. If it works well the republicans will never get power again. Is that what you're really afraid of? Seems like it.

Click to expand...

But isn't that essentially what you want to see here in the US?? Zero conservative representation??

Bassman said:

But isn't that essentially what you want to see here in the US?? Zero conservative representation??

Click to expand...

Why would I want that? Most of my beliefs are conservative. I just lean liberal when it comes to social issues.
I just don't like going off half cocked without knowing all the facts, unlike some diehards here.
If the final bill saves me money I will like it. If it costs me more, I won't. I just don't believe much that comes out of the mouths of politicians. Dem or Rep.

Dirty Harry said:

Why would I want that? Most of my beliefs are conservative. I just lean liberal when it comes to social issues.

Click to expand...

Yet without a strong opposition to the Democrats, they will essentially be the only game in town.

I just don't like going off half cocked without knowing all the facts, unlike some diehards here.
If the final bill saves me money I will like it. If it costs me more, I won't. I just don't believe much that comes out of the mouths of politicians. Dem or Rep.

Click to expand...

But that's the point. I would rather the government stay the **** out of social welfare issues like healthcare and poverty because of their piss-poor handling of the latter.

Dirty Harry said:

Do you even know what is in the bill? Or what will be in the bill if it makes it through the House?
If it is that bad the democrats will be ousted in 4 years and the GOP can put everything back to where it was. If it works well the republicans will never get power again. Is that what you're really afraid of? Seems like it.

Click to expand...

It's less of a Republican/Democrat thing and more of a competency in government thing. While it's not unreasonable to ask if we can use government intelligently so that we can make healthcare more affordable to the masses, the rub in that statement is using government intelligently. Government isn't the most intelligent of creations, and oft works only for their own power and greed. As such, when you actually employ the government to intercede in these types of affairs, the outcome is mostly something to funnel money from the People and to the protected classes for which Congress serves. The healthcare bill currently is more a play towards insurance and pharmaceutical companies than it is something for the betterment of the People. It's one of the dangers of using government to solve problems, it usually just makes things worse.

Ikari said:

It's less of a Republican/Democrat thing and more of a competency in government thing. While it's not unreasonable to ask if we can use government intelligently so that we can make healthcare more affordable to the masses, the rub in that statement is using government intelligently. Government isn't the most intelligent of creations, and oft works only for their own power and greed. As such, when you actually employ the government to intercede in these types of affairs, the outcome is mostly something to funnel money from the People and to the protected classes for which Congress serves. The healthcare bill currently is more a play towards insurance and pharmaceutical companies than it is something for the betterment of the People. It's one of the dangers of using government to solve problems, it usually just makes things worse.

Click to expand...

First, I thank you for the reasoned response.

But, can't this be said of almost all large organizations, including big business?

As for a play toward the insurance companies. As I understand it it boils down to this. We need to do away with things like pre-existing conditions. One poster here, actually arguing against mandated insurance, noted that with no refusal pre-existing conditions, a person could sign up once notified of a serious problem, or suspecting one, get the treatment paid for and drop the policy, essentially getting a lot of money and paying little out. So, the insurance industry has a concern here, and rightly so.

To combat this concern, and it is a reasonable compromise, insurance is mandated. I would call this anything unreasonable for either the insurance industry ot the government to discuss and address.

Now as for the pharmaceutical industry, what are you referring to exactly?

Boo Radley said:

But, can't this be said of almost all large organizations, including big business?

Click to expand...

Yes, but at least with business their intentions are clear.

Though we should note that we do currently have a broken system. Americans pay more money into healthcare than anyone else and have the least access to it. It's something that should be solved. And there are ways to use government to solve the problem. But we really have to watch, constrain, and constantly look over the shoulder of government to make sure that they are doing it well. Most industrialized countries have some form of public healthcare and it's not unreasonable to request it here. But if we want something which benefits the majority of the People, we have to make sure that Congress is acting in our interest, not the interest of their lobbyists. I think that on some from, government offered healthcare was an inevitability. And if it were to be inevitable, then we need to construct it right from the start and restrict how government can use the program to prevent fraud and corruption.

Boo Radley said:

Now as for the pharmaceutical industry, what are you referring to exactly?

Click to expand...

That came about in one of the meetings with Democrats and I think Obama where they promised not to instituted any form of legislation against price gouging in order for them (pharmaceutical companies) to pledge a bunch of money into the system and getting the bill passed.

I think one of the clearer things to do with this, if we had to go the path would be the following. Government covers big things. Cancer, diabetes, organ transplants, etc. Expensive procedures which cost a lot of money and one reason why insurance premiums are high and the whole "pre-existing condition" thing. Regular healthcare like going to see a doctor, getting a prescription for a cold, broken bones, etc. can be handled then through private insurance. That would decrease the cost of private insurance and make it more affordable to most people. Something like that would benefit a larger number of people than what we're going to get which is basically mandating that we have insurance and enforcing it through the IRS and police.

Internal Memo Confirms Big Giveaways In White House Deal With Big Pharma

what an idiot

obama, i mean

Ikari said:

Yes, but at least with business their intentions are clear.

Click to expand...

From what I read here, many think the governments intentions are claer as well.

Though we should note that we do currently have a broken system. Americans pay more money into healthcare than anyone else and have the least access to it. It's something that should be solved. And there are ways to use government to solve the problem. But we really have to watch, constrain, and constantly look over the shoulder of government to make sure that they are doing it well. Most industrialized countries have some form of public healthcare and it's not unreasonable to request it here. But if we want something which benefits the majority of the People, we have to make sure that Congress is acting in our interest, not the interest of their lobbyists. I think that on some from, government offered healthcare was an inevitability. And if it were to be inevitable, then we need to construct it right from the start and restrict how government can use the program to prevent fraud and corruption.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree with this.

That came about in one of the meetings with Democrats and I think Obama where they promised not to instituted any form of legislation against price gouging in order for them (pharmaceutical companies) to pledge a bunch of money into the system and getting the bill passed.

I think one of the clearer things to do with this, if we had to go the path would be the following. Government covers big things. Cancer, diabetes, organ transplants, etc. Expensive procedures which cost a lot of money and one reason why insurance premiums are high and the whole "pre-existing condition" thing. Regular healthcare like going to see a doctor, getting a prescription for a cold, broken bones, etc. can be handled then through private insurance. That would decrease the cost of private insurance and make it more affordable to most people. Something like that would benefit a larger number of people than what we're going to get which is basically mandating that we have insurance and enforcing it through the IRS and police.

Click to expand...

That too sound reasonable. Think conservative or the opposition would buy this?

The Prof said:

Internal Memo Confirms Big Giveaways In White House Deal With Big Pharma

what an idiot

obama, i mean

Click to expand...

Sounds like a deal only good if everyone keeps their word, which have doubts about.

It says the White House agreed to oppose any congressional efforts to use the government's leverage to bargain for lower drug prices or import drugs from Canada -- and also agreed not to pursue Medicare rebates or shift some drugs from Medicare Part B to Medicare Part D, which would cost Big Pharma billions in reduced reimbursements.

In exchange, the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA) agreed to cut $80 billion in projected costs to taxpayers and senior citizens over ten years. Or, as the memo says: "Commitment of up to $80 billion, but not more than $80 billion."

Click to expand...

Boo Radley said:

That too sound reasonable. Think conservative or the opposition would buy this?

Click to expand...

No. I don't think it's something that lobbyists would get on board with and I don't think it would funnel enough money to the major parties' coffers for them to attempt something like this.