The skinny on healthcare, who is lying?

**Sstashmoo** · November-02-09, 07:25 PM

Quote: "wait a minute...back then a loaf of bread was a nickel, if that, a new car cost $600 [[120 days), and a house in a good neighborhood was $1200 [[240 days)"

Yeah, we got it so bad now. The reality is most of us live exorbitant lifestyles nowadays by comparison of 50 years ago. We are a spoiled country. If we don't own two cars, some expensive toys[[fourwheelers/jetskis), cell phones, a TV in every room, 200 channels with high def, DVD collection, and a place up north, we aren't doing very well.

ccbatson · November-02-09, 07:30 PM

Desiring and accomplishing wealth through the production and sale of a good or service is to be admired. Borrowing or without the means or a plan to repay or stealing to gain wealth is evil.

**Papasito** · November-02-09, 07:34 PM

They say it will cost the average family about $4k a year to take this insurance, and if you refuse it, you can get fined. If you don't pay the fine, I'm assuming they will jail you.

But under what constitutional grounds can they do this?
There are none.

This will make a great Supreme Court Case

**Big Dog** · November-02-09, 07:43 PM

Papsito, Who is they? Glenn Beck?

Lorax · November-02-09, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Desiring and accomplishing wealth through the production and sale of a good or service is to be admired. Borrowing or without the means or a plan to repay or stealing to gain wealth is evil.

How lofty of you.

Nice to see everything is the same in your world of black/white, either/or.

So just about all business that stole from the people, which would be over 90% of all current operating banks, financial institutions, etc, qualify as evil by your metric. Which I wouldn't disagree with.

"Desiring and accomplishing wealth" as you put it really should be worshipped, not just simply admired, which is what you really meant to say.

**Sstashmoo** · November-02-09, 08:05 PM

"Who is they?"

Anybody that has read the bill. There are provisions in this bill that would allow insurance companies to increase an existing policy's premium 25%. Now, the people that don't have any insurance: As it is the general practice of insurance companies, they will more than likely be considered high risk, and be paying higher premiums because of it. This isn't fearporn, this is a valid statement based on how insurance companies operate. Anyone who thinks they are going to make it affordable when they don't have to, is kidding themselves. The insurance companies are money making machines driven by aggressive investors. Man they gotta be on the edge of their seat hoping this thing passes. Cha-ching.

We need something but not this.

**Sstashmoo** · November-02-09, 08:09 PM

Quote: "and if you refuse it, you can get fined. If you don't pay the fine, I'm assuming they will jail you."

Oh great instead of 60 million uninsured, it will be 60 million with an outstanding arrest warrant.. good plan.

ccbatson · November-02-09, 08:19 PM

Oh yes lorax, the second handed corporate socialist sell out corporations are as much the enemy of liberty as the socialist collectivists themselves, maybe moreso. Haven't you been paying any attention?

**ghettopalmetto** · November-02-09, 08:32 PM

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

There are provisions in this bill that would allow insurance companies to increase an existing policy's premium 25%.

Citation, please.

**Sstashmoo** · November-02-09, 08:45 PM

http://rawstory.com/2009/10/kucinich...nce-companies/

"According to Congressman Dennis Kucinich [[D-OH), the Democrats' health reform legislation is basically a sham."

" "It's on page 22 of the bill," he replied. "Right here, it says that rates shall be set at a level that does not exceed 125 percent of the prevailing standard rate for comparable coverage in the individual market. Now ... It's very easy to understand what that means.""

**Papasito** · November-02-09, 08:55 PM

Originally Posted by Big Dog

Papsito, Who is they? Glenn Beck?

Nothing to do with conservative talk shows. I'm referencing figures given in news articles, not propaganda from the radio.

People are confused, thinking this is free health care for the poor, which it's not.
This is all about selling Health Care insurance, and being penalized for not purchasing it from the one and only provider - the Government

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...insurance.html
Sep 8, 2009 ... A proposal being shopped around by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., calls for fining Americans who do not buy health ...

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/wa...rance_mandate/

A legal challenge to the health care mandate may be several years away. To challenge this in court, a taxpayer would have to face a penalty, and the pending legislation does not phase in the penalties until after 2013.

A legal challenge to the health care mandate may be several years away. To challenge this in court, a taxpayer would have to face a penalty, and the pending ...

Articles like these number in the thousands

ccbatson · November-02-09, 09:04 PM

I can scarcely believe that even liberals believe this 1990 page power grab to be good for healthcare...they can't be that stupid...can they?

**Sstashmoo** · November-02-09, 10:22 PM

Do they really believe that people that aren't buying health insurance now are going to magically start paying for it. This is going to be impossible to enforce in any manner. It would be like trying to fine people for not wanting to work. They simply aren't going to do it. They'd have to lock up half the south

**rb336** · November-03-09, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

I can scarcely believe that even liberals believe this 1990 page power grab to be good for healthcare...they can't be that stupid...can they?

real liberals aren't stupid. they know the only way to improve the health care situation is to get private insurance out of the general health insurabce business. they add nothing and suck out 2/3 of the money that SHOULD be used to help people get andstay well

**Sstashmoo** · November-03-09, 09:36 AM

The term "insurance" needs to be taken out of the equation entirely. It implies hedging ones health and well-being, and access to affordable care. It should not be a gamble of any sort. Affordable healthcare. Let the health insurance companies die, nothing in etched in stone that says they must exist.

**elganned** · November-03-09, 12:38 PM

I'm all in favor of that. But it won't really be practical until the cost of healthcare [[not healthcare insurance) is addressed.

Which has been my problem with this latest national debate from Day 1: Nobody is talking about the root problem. Insurance reform is just a band-aid that doesn't deal with the underlying problem.

**Sstashmoo** · November-03-09, 01:10 PM

Yes Elganned, and the attorneys coercing each of us to sue one another. Dangling the million dollar carrot every 15 seconds on television.

**rb336** · November-03-09, 02:30 PM

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

Yes Elganned, and the attorneys coercing each of us to sue one another. Dangling the million dollar carrot every 15 seconds on television.

the whole tort reform thing is a huge red herring. VERY few cases ever see the light of day, and if there WAS tort reform, do you really think the insurance companies would lower malpractice insurance rates? All the tort reform tools want is for the Big I to suck even more money out of the sytem without having to put anything back

ccbatson · November-03-09, 04:36 PM

If insurance provides value and consumers are free to do as they like, who is government to intervene?

Deregulate and take employers out of the equation.

**Sstashmoo** · November-03-09, 06:13 PM

Quote: "Deregulate and take employers out of the equation. "

How would that effect rates? All individual policies, introducing further competition? If that's what you're suggesting, it hasn't worked for car insurance. The insurance companies just band together and keep prices high. Like me, no tickets, no accidents, and I'm told due to probability studies by insurers, this increases my risk. It's a no-win situation, they always have an excuse to charge more. The reality is, I'll probably never have an accident, doesn't it seem feasible that one carrier would recognize this and offer me a more competitive rate to secure my business? Not one ever has.

Lorax · November-03-09, 07:34 PM

That's because all administrations of the last 40 years have encouraged cartels in insurance and other areas of our society as well.

When you are allowed to price fix, it's considered illegal in most businesses, but happens all the time, and with insurance companies it's encouraged.

Medical insurance companies are not subject to the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and are one of only two industries [[the other being professional football) in this elite club, and have enjoyed decades of freedom to form these cartels which only work against the public, as we are now awakening to.

**rb336** · November-04-09, 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

If insurance provides value and consumers are free to do as they like, who is government to intervene?

that is just it -- insurance is NOT a value-added thing, it is value-subtractive [[it extracts value without actually creating anything)

Deregulate and take employers out of the equation.

god, your statements are really getting more and more daft

Lorax · November-04-09, 09:01 AM

What is breathtaking about SStashmoo's stance on unions is that without them, his own income would no doubt be lessened.

Union wages drove this economy for decades, nationwide. They created the middle class as we know it.

Why do you think Detroit evolved into a city of free-standing homes as opposed to stacks of apartment buildings?

The evidence is all around you, and the corporations fared very well, thank you very much for all of those decades until our trade imbalance accellerated due to the policies of Reagan trickle-down economics.

With removal of tariffs, and a corporate/banking class encouraging American corporations to off-shore their labor pool for cheaper wages, we wouldn't be in this mess today.

If American corporations want to off-shore labor and re-import the goods, an incoming tariff needs to be slapped on it.

Unions are nothing more than a punching bag for the Rehtuglican Reich, and they have done everything in their power, including this last year of economic collapse to try and bust them all.

I say they need to hold on, stand their ground, and force the system to keep our wages up, so we don't give in to the "new world order" bullshit of the Reich and accept a lower standard of living, while bringing up the standard of living in China and India, who will only demand higer wages themselves, and unionize as they tire of working for slave wages.

**Sstashmoo** · November-04-09, 09:54 AM

Lorax, unless the Government addresses trade and it isn't looking like they are going to, we cannot survive with high labor costs. Funny some of you can only see it from the workers perspective. Just as you must balance your budget and adjust your costs to your income, companies are in the same boat. The attitudes are and understandings are going to have to change. Ford posts a profit and some are trying to lay claim to it. How about when Ford was hemorrhaging cash on a daily basis, would they have been willing to work without a paycheck? They got paid when the company lost money. It is that attitude that has broken Detroit. I agree the Unions helped build a higher level of middle class, but it would have happened anyway. Non union shops have to pay to get the people they want. People should be paid by their work ethic and abilities. So before unions, everyone lived in an apartment? You can't be serious.

Time's have changed and it doesn't matter now who's fault it is/was. They have changed, change with them or else.

**ghettopalmetto** · November-04-09, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

Lorax, unless the Government addresses trade and it isn't looking like they are going to, we cannot survive with high labor costs. Funny some of you can only see it from the workers perspective. Just as you must balance your budget and adjust your costs to your income, companies are in the same boat. The attitudes are and understandings are going to have to change.

Yet the leading export nation in the world is Germany, which not only has high wages, but one a dem pesky socialized health care systems!

The only third-world export nation in the global top ten is China, and even there, the standard of living is rising.

Which makes me wonder why people think we need to rely on sweatshop labor and cheap plastic junk in order to survive economically.