• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Nelson says he'll support healthcare bill

Boo Radley said:
Not sure that is what I said. Take buying insurance, premiums are to be paid. It isn't free. But as you are paying for them right now. If we do nothing at all, you are paying for them right now. Not just people in medicare or medicaid, but people, working people often, who are on in any government program, who are uninsured, and who receive medical care. You're paying for them right now, in the most expensive way. Seems to me that some intelligent spending might be better.
Click to expand...


You're skirting it. Everything you have been saying is me, as the taxpayer, through my ability, paying for those with a need. You've already said in several situations that is how it should be, so just admit it.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
You're skirting it. Everything you have been saying is me, as the taxpayer, through my ability, paying for those with a need. You've already said in several situations that is how it should be, so just admit it.


j-mac
Click to expand...

What I have said is that we can tackle problems that effect us. We can. And that we pay for those getting health care right now. And we do so in a very non cost effective manner.

I believe in both personal responsibility and community responsibility. When faced with a costly problem, or a harmful problem, we can work together to solve these problems. And it may require we spend some money through taxes.
 
Boo Radley said:
What I have said is that we can tackle problems that effect us. We can. And that we pay for those getting health care right now. And we do so in a very non cost effective manner.

I believe in both personal responsibility and community responsibility. When faced with a costly problem, or a harmful problem, we can work together to solve these problems. And it may require we spend some money through taxes.
Click to expand...


do you believe that Medicare is an efficient program?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
do you believe that Medicare is an efficient program?


j-mac
Click to expand...

considering they have to take the worse of the worse, yes. It isn't like a universal insurer would be, in which they had a large pool that included large numbers of well people. This is an important aspect.
 
Boo Radley said:
considering they have to take the worse of the worse, yes. It isn't like a universal insurer would be, in which they had a large pool that included large numbers of well people. This is an important aspect.
Click to expand...


Isn't that the supposed scheme of Social Security? Able working people paying the tax to make the payments to the retired?

Let's see how those two programs are fairing.


Government obligations for Social Security and Medicare may soon exceed the combined net worth of every household and nonprofit organization in the country.

Is America about to go broke? - MSN Money
Click to expand...


The financial condition of the Social Security and Medicare programs remains challenging. Projected long run program costs are not sustainable under current program parameters.

Trustees Report Summary
Click to expand...


The 2009 Social Security and Medicare Trustees Reports show the combined unfunded liability of these two programs has reached nearly $107 trillion in today's dollars! That is about seven times the size of the U.S. economy and 10 times the size of the outstanding national debt.


Social Security and Medicare Projections: 2009 - Brief Analysis #662
Click to expand...


Now you want to add another social program like these?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Isn't that the supposed scheme of Social Security? Able working people paying the tax to make the payments to the retired?

Let's see how those two programs are fairing.
Click to expand...

Not entirely no. SS was suppose to a supplement and not the entire program. It's really very different than Medicare and medicaid. It's a case of doing something it wasn't designed to do.



Now you want to add another social program like these?


j-mac
Click to expand...

Despite problems, these programs do serve a real purpose and shouldn't go away. What I want is to design a program that is effective and less costly than what we're doing now. Present proposals won't likely do that, but we can only to one that will by moving forward. Letting the fear mongering win won't help us much.
 
Boo Radley said:
Not entirely no. SS was suppose to a supplement and not the entire program. It's really very different than Medicare and medicaid. It's a case of doing something it wasn't designed to do.
Click to expand...


I know it pays more than just retirement benefits, however, I always understood the act to be that as a safety net to retiring persons, that everyone participates, and everyone collects after the designated age. Now in earlier times, I think it was three workers contributing to one retirees check, that number has fallen to nearly one to one. Or in other words, unsustainable.

When I think of all the money taken out of my earnings over my years in the work force, and had that money been invested in other ways, I would have alot more than I do now.


Despite problems, these programs do serve a real purpose and shouldn't go away. What I want is to design a program that is effective and less costly than what we're doing now. Present proposals won't likely do that, but we can only to one that will by moving forward. Letting the fear mongering win won't help us much.
Click to expand...


I think you are dreaming. Nothing leads any rational person in this country to believe that the government can do what it is you're looking for. The purpose these programs serve is to redistribute my earnings to those who don't or won't earn them on their own. That is not what this country was founded on.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
I know it pays more than just retirement benefits, however, I always understood the act to be that as a safety net to retiring persons, that everyone participates, and everyone collects after the designated age. Now in earlier times, I think it was three workers contributing to one retirees check, that number has fallen to nearly one to one. Or in other words, unsustainable.

When I think of all the money taken out of my earnings over my years in the work force, and had that money been invested in other ways, I would have alot more than I do now.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is a large part of the problem, but it was also suppose to only be a supplement, not all of retirement. I know of a few who invested money and right at retirement time saw it disappear (I think you know a few as well). Investment isn't a magic bullet either.



I think you are dreaming. Nothing leads any rational person in this country to believe that the government can do what it is you're looking for. The purpose these programs serve is to redistribute my earnings to those who don't or won't earn them on their own. That is not what this country was founded on.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Well, we certainly see this differently. I completely disagree. Government is a means by which we can work to solve problems.
 
Boo Radley said:
Yes, that is a large part of the problem, but it was also suppose to only be a supplement, not all of retirement. I know of a few who invested money and right at retirement time saw it disappear (I think you know a few as well). Investment isn't a magic bullet either.





Well, we certainly see this differently. I completely disagree. Government is a means by which we can work to solve problems.
Click to expand...


The largest thing I think we see differently here is that you seem to see government as the answer to problems, and I see it AS the problem. ;)


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
The largest thing I think we see differently here is that you seem to see government as the answer to problems, and I see it AS the problem. ;)


j-mac
Click to expand...

No, I see us as the government. We the people, a government of the people, by the people, for the people (grew up repeating that). I believe it. And I believe we can solve problems by working through the government. It is not the only way, nor should it be, but it is a way.
 
Boo Radley said:
No, I see us as the government. We the people, a government of the people, by the people, for the people (grew up repeating that). I believe it. And I believe we can solve problems by working through the government. It is not the only way, nor should it be, but it is a way.
Click to expand...


Yeah, a proven inefficient way. What in today's government leads you to believe that the current government is "Of, by, and for" the people anymore. They blatantly ignore the wishes of the people.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Yeah, a proven inefficient way. What in today's government leads you to believe that the current government is "Of, by, and for" the people anymore. They blatantly ignore the wishes of the people.


j-mac
Click to expand...

It's pretty inefficient what we're doing right now. We can't even monitor how much is charged due to treating people who can't pay. What does a bandaid cost at a hospital?

We can do better.

And yes, republicans have ignored the wishes of the people who wanted a public option, doing away with pre-existing conditions (which can't be done without a mandate that everyone is insured), and much of what Obama wanted.
 
ben nelson, joe lieberman, mary landrieu, blanche lincoln, kent conrad...

bluedogs, freshmen, omnipresent olympia...

obama himself...

they're the ones who dispatched the pretty PO

get real
 
Boo Radley said:
No, I see us as the government. We the people, a government of the people, by the people, for the people (grew up repeating that). I believe it. And I believe we can solve problems by working through the government. It is not the only way, nor should it be, but it is a way.
Click to expand...

If that were true then why is it that every poll that I look at the majority of people DO NOT want the currently proposed health care bill?

Let me guess, because it's been dragging on for so long and because of the "lies" spread by republicans right?

I agree that the Government is suppose to be Of the people, By the people, and For the people. But reality shows that it is no longer this way.
 
Kal'Stang said:
If that were true then why is it that every poll that I look at the majority of people DO NOT want the currently proposed health care bill?

Let me guess, because it's been dragging on for so long and because of the "lies" spread by republicans right?

I agree that the Government is suppose to be Of the people, By the people, and For the people. But reality shows that it is no longer this way.
Click to expand...

I've explained this a few times. The opposition has made it one ugly process and democrats haven't helped much.

However, when ever polls ask specific questions, like do you want the public option, the answer has been yes for a majority. When asked do you want to do away with pre-existing conditions, they want that. On the details, for the most part, the people are much closer to Obama's view. So, a government of the people goes for what they want, even if it looks like they don't with misleading polls. And if they get it wrong, we vote them out.

And were there some lies? Yes: Death panels, rationing, going to jail, socialism. Yes, there have been lies. Some by some republican leaders. And yes, democrats have not always been completely honest either. But you really have to work to get worse than the death panel whopper.
 
Boo Radley said:
I've explained this a few times. The opposition has made it one ugly process and democrats haven't helped much.
Click to expand...


Utter MSNBC BS! Tell me what it is that you think repubs hold so much power over when they are not even allowed into the closed door sessions that hammer out the bill?


However, when ever polls ask specific questions, like do you want the public option, the answer has been yes for a majority. When asked do you want to do away with pre-existing conditions, they want that. On the details, for the most part, the people are much closer to Obama's view.
Click to expand...


Again, not truthful at all. Polls on specifics show that the people don't want government control of their personal health care. Polls on specifics show that the people don't want to give up what they currently have. Polls on specifics show that the people believe that the current system can be fixed without a total takeover. Polls on specifics show that the people believe that the demo's have not been truthful with them on what is happening.....Shall I continue?


So, a government of the people goes for what they want, even if it looks like they don't with misleading polls. And if they get it wrong, we vote them out.
Click to expand...


Misleading polls eh? I bet those are all polls that don't show support for Obama's agenda concerning health care reform right? And you problem about waiting until we can vote them out is the damage they can reap in the mean time.


And were there some lies? Yes: Death panels, rationing, going to jail, socialism. Yes, there have been lies. Some by some republican leaders. And yes, democrats have not always been completely honest either. But you really have to work to get worse than the death panel whopper.
Click to expand...


No, these were not lies. Rationing is a reality in every publicly offered health care system in the world. All these things are points about Obama's plans that you wish to marginalize, but they are very real, and likely possibilities.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
No, these were not lies. Rationing is a reality in every publicly offered health care system in the world.
Click to expand...
True, Canada is trying to semi-privatize their system currently because of overburdensome cost, France is having major budgetary problems with their health system, Cuba has a two tier system(those with power get great care, everyone else gets sub-par care), England has well documented care gaps, etc. etc.
 
LaMidRighter said:
True, Canada is trying to semi-privatize their system currently because of overburdensome cost, France is having major budgetary problems with their health system, Cuba has a two tier system(those with power get great care, everyone else gets sub-par care), England has well documented care gaps, etc. etc.
Click to expand...


That's right, but we aren't supposed to look at those, because the maga brains in the halls of corruption have a better idea. Only problem is that they won't share it with anyone, even their colleges.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Utter MSNBC BS! Tell me what it is that you think repubs hold so much power over when they are not even allowed into the closed door sessions that hammer out the bill?
Click to expand...

We're talking about public perception j. You're being kind of misleading here with this comment. It was the death panel, rationing, and socialism type misinformation that clouded everything. The ability to cloud, as we've seen over the years, is not limited to those in power.



Again, not truthful at all. Polls on specifics show that the people don't want government control of their personal health care. Polls on specifics show that the people don't want to give up what they currently have. Polls on specifics show that the people believe that the current system can be fixed without a total takeover. Polls on specifics show that the people believe that the demo's have not been truthful with them on what is happening.....Shall I continue?
Click to expand...

We've seen the polls and what I said is exactly accurate. You're truthful claim is rather a subjective type of thing that also doesn't dispute the fact that they want those items. Again, you point to a criteria directed related to what I said went wrong, actually supporting my claims.



Misleading polls eh? I bet those are all polls that don't show support for Obama's agenda concerning health care reform right? And you problem about waiting until we can vote them out is the damage they can reap in the mean time.
Click to expand...

You misread the polls. Again, look at when asked about specifics. To rebut me, you have to do that.



No, these were not lies. Rationing is a reality in every publicly offered health care system in the world. All these things are points about Obama's plans that you wish to marginalize, but they are very real, and likely possibilities.


j-mac
Click to expand...

No it's a lie. Government would no more ration that your insurance company does right now. Neither gives us our absolute free rain, but neither do what would actually be rationing. It's a lie your side uses to cloud the issue.
 
LaMidRighter said:
True, Canada is trying to semi-privatize their system currently because of overburdensome cost, France is having major budgetary problems with their health system, Cuba has a two tier system(those with power get great care, everyone else gets sub-par care), England has well documented care gaps, etc. etc.
Click to expand...

You do realize no such program has as much as been proposed here? This to is another misdirection so as to not address what was actually proposed.
 
Boo Radley said:
You do realize no such program has as much as been proposed here?
Click to expand...
Yes it has, it's called "single Payor", "nationalized Healthcare", "Universal healthcare", "medical device tax" and any other euphamism for taxpayor subsidized healthcare. This bill started as exactly a combination of the multiple UHC sytems worldwide and has devolved into this mess.
This to is another misdirection so as to not address what was actually proposed.
Click to expand...
It isn't misdirection on my part, this bill is basically the result of the lack of our congress to get exactly what they want, however, the seeds are being planted for exactly the kinds of "single payor" systems that do not work. Again, I am a Life/Health insurance agent and have been keeping up with this for many years.
 
LaMidRighter said:
Yes it has, it's called "single Payor", "nationalized Healthcare", "Universal healthcare", "medical device tax" and any other euphamism for taxpayor subsidized healthcare. This bill started as exactly a combination of the multiple UHC sytems worldwide and has devolved into this mess. It isn't misdirection on my part, this bill is basically the result of the lack of our congress to get exactly what they want, however, the seeds are being planted for exactly the kinds of "single payor" systems that do not work. Again, I am a Life/Health insurance agent and have been keeping up with this for many years.
Click to expand...

No single payer nationalize universal care system has been proposed in the US. There never was one proposed. Again, you have your facts wrong.
 
Boo Radley said:
No single payer nationalize universal care system has been proposed in the US. There never was one proposed. Again, you have your facts wrong.
Click to expand...
The **** it hasn't!
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__V8cLkMctM"]YouTube- Universal Health Care Scam, Congressman's aid admits US Health System is "good" (Part 1 of 6.)[/ame] [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xm6zze1pWyM"]YouTube- John Edwards - "Health Care" Television Ad - Iowa[/ame]

And what do you think HillaryCare was HMMMM?
 
Show me something before congress. That's what you need to form an effective rebuttal. After all, that's what a proposal is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom