View Poll Results: Will you utilize the public healthcare option?

Voters
60. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    21 35.00%
  • No

    23 38.33%
  • Maybe

    16 26.67%
Page 12 of 22 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 218

Thread: Would you utilize the public option?

  1. #111
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,759

    Re: Would you utilize the public option?

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    I'm not sure how this is any different than what I've already said...
    You seemed to be saying that the government would have more control over your health and health care than insurance companies...and what I'm saying is that this would be no different than what insurance companies already have. To me, neither is acceptable.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  2. #112
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Would you utilize the public option?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    no kidding?


    People, like you, are so focused on not paying for the health care of others that you seem to forget the fact that the system is based on shifting costs. You are already paying for the health insurance of every teacher, policeman, town clerk, politician, old person, poor person, fat person, disabled person...and the list goes on. The only reason the system functions, at all, is that so many people have been bought off at someone else's expense that the level of outrage has been reduced to the entrepeneurial class- the self-employed and small business person. No, I don't expect anyone to care about me PERSONALLY. I am just speaking for every farmer, fisherman, small retailer, craftsman, restaurant owner ,etc., you ever encountered. I don't understand why anyone would prefer to spend 30 cents of every dollar to line the pockets of some C.E.O rather than give the farmer down the road a shot at affordable insurance...that is, a non profit large pool H. insurance plan.
    In fact, if you read my posts, I am not asking for charity- I am asking to be treated the same way all of the corporate serfs are treated- as part of a LARGE Risk POOL. How many ways do I have to say this for it to sink in??? People who are self-employed or manage small business, anyone who seeks insurance in the individual market is unfairly skr*wed and we need a public option to substitute for the fact that for-profit H.Insurance does not really function.
    You're speaking for me when you say you're speaking for all those you claim to. And I disagree with what you're saying on my behalf.

    I also disagree with my money paying for anyone's healthcare except those I CHOOSE to pay for.

    I would like for my money to pay for MY healthcare and those I love.

    I would also like for people not to think that they're entitled to my money just because I have it.

  3. #113
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Would you utilize the public option?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    You seemed to be saying that the government would have more control over your health and health care than insurance companies...and what I'm saying is that this would be no different than what insurance companies already have. To me, neither is acceptable.
    They would have more control. They can make laws, ban food, drink and/or mandate certain "healthy" activities. When they have a vested financial interest in the public health, then they have a financial incentive to make sure we don't do "bad things" to ourselves. Insurance companies cannot do that.

  4. #114
    Professor
    Cassandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Last Seen
    11-02-17 @ 02:39 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,319

    Re: Would you utilize the public option?

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    You're speaking for me when you say you're speaking for all those you claim to. And I disagree with what you're saying on my behalf.
    You disagree with what? You would rather pay twice as much as someone who works for a large corporation? And be priced out of the market if you have a health problem ?

    I also disagree with my money paying for anyone's healthcare except those I CHOOSE to pay for.
    So you keep saying but it is a meaningless statement- that is how the system functions unless you are self-pay. Are you uninsured? Then, only then, you are paying for yourself alone...at a premium.
    They would have more control. They can make laws, ban food, drink and/or mandate certain "healthy" activities. When they have a vested financial interest in the public health, then they have a financial incentive to make sure we don't do "bad things" to ourselves. Insurance companies cannot do that.
    NO. Corporations can and do, reward people with healthy habits and penalize people with unhealthy habits. They can and do deny health insurance to people for all kinds of reasons.

    Meanwhile, you are the guy who does not want to pay for H.C. for anyone but yourself. Why should MY health insurance premiums (or yours) reflect the health care costs of all the fat couch potatoes that clog the H.C. system? Gov't will never ban junk food but isn't it about time they stop subsidizing the consumption of toxic material?

  5. #115
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: Would you utilize the public option?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    The condescension was quite on target and just a response to your own nastiness. If you do not like it, I make two suggestions: 1) Post civilly and you will get the same in response; 2) Demonstrate some understanding of the topic being discussed and respond in context.
    No, your vapid arrogance and condescension are more what one comes to expect from someone who has absolutely no clue of what it is they are attempting to debate. What typically happens when one debates you is that you then engage in personal attacks and obfuscations and eventually enter in the circle of futility by constantly making new uninformed statements eventually circling back to the original uninformed statement.

    Nothing in my initial remarks were nasty; they were seeking to debate the merits of your silly notions that denying benefits is the same as a breach of contract.

    I am a direct reflection of the nastiness, arrogance and condescension you spew whenever your nonsensical arguments are exposed for what they are; uninformed.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Your agenda is wha all extreme rightwing hyperpartisans have. Only speak in misrepresentations, foolish generalizations, inaccurate fear mongering, out of context comments, and outright dishonesty. Unless you have changed, and this thread seems to show that you haven't, your posts go along with your agenda.
    Your nonsensical perceptions aside, wow trite and amusing that you would now engage in empty headed hyperbolic demagoguery to avoid the fact that you are an uninformed partisan hack who couldn’t debate without becoming uncivil and projecting your complete lack of civility onto others.

    I would love to have you honestly show where I have not been factual, honest and inaccurate in any of my statements without your typical uncivil arrogance and condescension.

    The ONLY ones being dishonest in this debate are you and your pals on the forum suggesting that anyone who doesn’t agree with your laughable positions is nothing more than an extreme rightwing hyper partisan.

    Just one time it would be nice to see you have an honest coherent debate instead of engaging into your typical playground uninformed demagoguery.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    And that's not what we are talking about.
    It is definitely what we are debating and your attempts to claim that we can only debate points that you wish to are beyond absurd, they are childish and immature.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    I know it's hard, but try to stay on topic.
    See above.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    The notion that you can lecture anyone on the dealings with insurance companies is laughable at best.
    The notion that you can be some expert on tort law and how economics actually work is laughable and the notion that your “self proclaimed” expertise on insurance has anything to do with this debate is ironic.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    You really don't know what you are talking about, do you? If this occurs, there is an appeal process that is in ALL insurance company agreements if you have a dispute. Once this process is exhausted (and there are usually 4-5 levels), then you can go the legal route. Same as with Medicare.

    So, as I said, these two scenarios are identical.
    I absolutely know what I am talking about and have clearly illustrated that it happens to be you who are obfuscating, projecting, lacking honesty and integrity and engaging in hyperbolic demagoguery.

    Your statements above don’t change what we are saying; if you have a dispute with a private insurance company, you can seek remedy within our courts. If you have this same issue with a PUBLICLY run healthcare system, there will be none. This is the point Void and I were trying to make and which you so desperately attempted to avoid with your nonsensical blather about breaches and denial of coverage being one and the same; which they are not.

    In addition, we attempted to explain that at least with competition and private markets there is a choice and if a company is not properly serving its customers or acting in an illegal manner, they will eventually go out of business, be bought up by companies that operate more efficiently, you will still have a CHOICE as to where you go and with competition, costs will go down and stay competitive.

    Government run programs do not provide that option; you will no longer have a choice, costs will skyrocket and they will operate very inefficiently resulting in less choices, long waiting lists and fewer doctors and nurses to treat patients not to mention the loss of research and development that results in technological breakthroughs.

    Those are FACTS based on the data available and historic record.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Get back to us when you have some basic understanding of how insurance companies operate. When you do, perhaps then you can add substance to this discussion.
    Get back to me when you can have an HONEST debate dealing with the FACTS and not engage in your typical hyper emotional hyperbolic blather and uninformed notions about the legal system, economics and your typical lack of substance.

  6. #116
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,759

    Re: Would you utilize the public option?

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    No, your vapid arrogance and condescension are more what one comes to expect from someone who has absolutely no clue of what it is they are attempting to debate. What typically happens when one debates you is that you then engage in personal attacks and obfuscations and eventually enter in the circle of futility by constantly making new uninformed statements eventually circling back to the original uninformed statement.

    Nothing in my initial remarks were nasty; they were seeking to debate the merits of your silly notions that denying benefits is the same as a breach of contract.

    I am a direct reflection of the nastiness, arrogance and condescension you spew whenever your nonsensical arguments are exposed for what they are; uninformed.
    You always post in an arrogant, condescending, attacking tone, especially when you have no idea what you are discussing...which is most of the time. Then you whine when you get it right back at you. You don't like it? Don't do it. I've told you this for a long time, but you seem to be unable to understand this rather simple concept. You want to continue to post like a jerk, you will get it right back. One things I will NOT do, however, is match your uninformed nonsense. I will continue to try to educate you.



    Your nonsensical perceptions aside, wow trite and amusing that you would now engage in empty headed hyperbolic demagoguery to avoid the fact that you are an uninformed partisan hack who couldn’t debate without becoming uncivil and projecting your complete lack of civility onto others.

    I would love to have you honestly show where I have not been factual, honest and inaccurate in any of my statements without your typical uncivil arrogance and condescension.

    The ONLY ones being dishonest in this debate are you and your pals on the forum suggesting that anyone who doesn’t agree with your laughable positions is nothing more than an extreme rightwing hyper partisan.

    Just one time it would be nice to see you have an honest coherent debate instead of engaging into your typical playground uninformed demagoguery.
    You post like an extreme rightwing partisan hack and an uninformed one at that. It would be nice if just once you could debate coherently without tossing in all of the partisan hack rubbish that you throw in each and every post you make, and actually make few accurate statements. Complete nonsense all of it. And, as usual, when you get what you give, you whine.

    Have you had enough of this crap, TD? Are you prepared to actually debate like a civil human being, for once?

    It is definitely what we are debating and your attempts to claim that we can only debate points that you wish to are beyond absurd, they are childish and immature.
    No, it's not. You want to change the goalposts because you've got nothing on the topic. I understand that. But you try to change them, I will call you on it. Don't like it? Don't change them.



    See above.
    See above.



    The notion that you can be some expert on tort law and how economics actually work is laughable and the notion that your “self proclaimed” expertise on insurance has anything to do with this debate is ironic.
    The notion that you can add any pertinent information to the topic at hand is laughable and the notion that you have any expertise on dealing with insurance companies is foolish.

    See how this works? You'll get what you give. Stop whining and debate the topic if you actually have anything of substance to add.



    I absolutely know what I am talking about and have clearly illustrated that it happens to be you who are obfuscating, projecting, lacking honesty and integrity and engaging in hyperbolic demagoguery.

    Your statements above don’t change what we are saying; if you have a dispute with a private insurance company, you can seek remedy within our courts. If you have this same issue with a PUBLICLY run healthcare system, there will be none. This is the point Void and I were trying to make and which you so desperately attempted to avoid with your nonsensical blather about breaches and denial of coverage being one and the same; which they are not.
    This is nonsense, and I have already explained why. There is a procedure if you have an issue with how either private or public insurance handles the releasing of your benefits. Both are identical. Suing a government agency in these cases is as allowable as suing an insurance company. Like I said, you do not know what you are talking about.

    In addition, we attempted to explain that at least with competition and private markets there is a choice and if a company is not properly serving its customers or acting in an illegal manner, they will eventually go out of business, be bought up by companies that operate more efficiently, you will still have a CHOICE as to where you go and with competition, costs will go down and stay competitive.

    Government run programs do not provide that option; you will no longer have a choice, costs will skyrocket and they will operate very inefficiently resulting in less choices, long waiting lists and fewer doctors and nurses to treat patients not to mention the loss of research and development that results in technological breakthroughs.

    Those are FACTS based on the data available and historic record.
    Facts are, this is not what we are discussing, nor is it the proposal on the table. This is you changing the goalposts. Start another thread, but don't pollute this one with your foolishness.

    [quoteGet back to me when you can have an HONEST debate dealing with the FACTS and not engage in your typical hyper emotional hyperbolic blather and uninformed notions about the legal system, economics and your typical lack of substance.[/QUOTE]

    Get back to me when you actually have some accurate information and have decided to debate civilly and without your usual nastiness or derailing tactics. Perhaps then we can discuss the issue at hand.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  7. #117
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: Would you utilize the public option?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Again this scatter shot does nothing to enlighten. I get it- you mistrust government.
    I mistrust Government run programs based on their record. I am constantly amazed that suddenly someone like you thinks that Government will manage 1/5 of the US economy better than the private markets and at a lower cost. There is not one single shred of evidence to support this assumption.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    There are 3 issues to address in U.S. health care.
    1) Americans are too unhealthy
    The FACT that many Americans are not healthy has ZERO to do with our health system. Understanding this is a first step to honest intellectual debate.

    Americans are not healthy because of their own behavior/habits; the best healthcare system in the world won’t make this fact any different.


    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    2) The cost of care ( insurance aside) has become too expensive
    Claiming that healthcare is expensive in a vacuum of comparative analysis is pretty useless.

    Yes, behind a mortgage, your car and insurance payments and groceries, healthcare is probably the fourth or fifth highest expense in your budget. But the notion that Government will bring down the costs cannot be supported by any facts or historic data.


    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    3) The "system" is structurally inefficient, a drag on the economy with embedded incentives that increase costs and leave people uninsured.
    This is nothing more than a claim. But the notion that a Government that cannot manage its own budget, prevent aliens from flooding into our borders and with a history of expensive mismanaged policies will now suddenly operate so efficient that the savings will pay for the program requires willful denial beyond the pale.

    Please name for me one Government program that was ever successful and well managed with credible links to support such a contention; just one.

    The most laughable part of such claims is the notion that people are uninsured because the Government hasn’t done anything.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    I believe that the plan, now being considered in Congress, is an inadequate baby step that barely addresses some of the issues in #3. I would much prefer a system like that of France's. But the private insurance system has already locked many people( like my family) out of the system so I'll take the public plan- gladly.
    Frances system is extremely expensive and that nation is struggling with the reality that they are rapidly running out of funds and are hard pressed to further tax an already overburdened tax payer.

    Like most countries, France faces problems of rising costs of prescription medication, increasing unemployment, and a large aging population.[11]
    Expenses related to the healthcare system in France represented 10.5% of the country's GDP and 15.4% of its public expenditures. In 2004, 78.4% of these expenses were paid for by the state.


    [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_healthcare_system]Health Care in France - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

    That's not to say the French have solved all health-care riddles. Like every other nation, France is wrestling with runaway health-care inflation. That has led to some hefty tax hikes, and France is now considering U.S.-style health-maintenance organization tactics to rein in costs. Still, some 65% of French citizens express satisfaction with their system, compared with 40% of U.S. residents. And France spends just 10.7% of its gross domestic product on health care, while the U.S. lays out 16%, more than any other nation.

    So far France has been able to hold down the burden on patients through a combination of price controls and increased government spending, but the latter effort has led to higher taxes for both employers and workers. In 1990, 7% of health-care expenditures were financed out of general revenue taxes, and the rest came from mandatory payroll taxes. By 2003, the general revenue figure had grown to 40%, and it's still not enough. The French national insurance system has been running constant deficits since 1985 and has ballooned to $13.5 billion.


    The French Lesson In Health Care

    Here are some more facts to digest:

    Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers, and academics beat the drum for a far larger government role in health care. Much of the public assumes that their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. Before we turn to government as the solution, however, we should consider some unheralded facts about America’s health care system.

    1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.

    2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.

    3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.

    4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.

    5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians.

    6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.

    7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed.

    8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians.

    9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain.

    10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.

    Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and care for the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

    Hoover Institution - Hoover Digest - Here’s a Second Opinion

  8. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Would you utilize the public option?

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Any answer other than "depends" is pointless.
    It doesn't "depend" for me...just saying.

  9. #119
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Would you utilize the public option?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Just as a point of reference, how many times have "government-agents" come knocking down your door this week? Or ever? Never? Not once? Oh alright then.
    You'll notice that he qualified his statement with "breaking the law", meaning, in the event that one does "break the law" government agents will break down your door...is that clear enough for you?

  10. #120
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

    Re: Would you utilize the public option?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Please point out what assertion I made. I'll give you a hint, Voidwar, because I know you have difficulty with terminology. I didn't make one.

    Are you prepared to clarify your terms, or are you still dancing?
    You need to reread the post.

    ObviousChild is the one it was directed to.

    Your post was quoted as proof for Obvious Child, that I questioned your assertion.

    YOU are the dancer Captain Courtesy.

    You have been running from my question since page two and anyone literate and interested knows it.

Page 12 of 22 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... 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
  •