Fair not necessary
Virgil Patterson, Emporia
Thursday, September 17, 2009
The impending health care bill will not be fair.
The insurance corporations are about to have their profits chopped by government intervention. They have employees to pay, claims to handle and stockholders to satisfy, and besides that, they have a right to make a profit. It is not fair to deny a for profit business in America the right to maintain or improve their margins. The treatment of for profit hospital corporations is also not fair. They must be profitable, but they are forced to take into their emergency rooms all comers whether they have a nickel or not. This is not fair to the hospital. Then the hospital bills me excessively (when I get surgery) to make up the shortfall in the emergency room. This is not fair to me.
In late summer of 1969 at 2 a.m., I was five clicks northwest of DaNang with my platoon. We took fire. I was not hit. Cooley, who was 20 feet from me, had a round from a grenade launcher land in his lower back. His lower backbone and both his kidneys were gone. Cooley was dead at 19; no more loves, no more dreams, no grandkids for Mom and Dad. Cooley was the firstborn male child of his parents. I also am the firstborn male child of my parents. My mom and dad got grandkids. Cooley’s parents got nothing, and that, people is really, really, really not fair.
But, if you put your American hat on for just a minute, it is possible to understand that when the country has a need that is great, what is fair becomes irrelevant.
Today our country is in danger of having its health-care industry implode. If costs are not contained and funding is not secured, we can very soon expect to see the system begin major downsizing. Many services will disappear and large numbers of Americans will suffer for it.
If America says no to reforming health care, the best health care in the world will soon be beyond the reach of the majority of Americans.
It seems to me quite curious that so many are so much more willing to sacrifice their firstborn than they are to part with some of their excesses.
Virgil Patterson
Emporia
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
So, are you promoting reform, or are you promoting the further socialization of the health care industry, Mr. Patterson? I wasn't quite able to tell.
Also, what services are at risk of disappearing? The angle you are coming from seems to be one I am unaware of and am curious about, or else I am misunderstanding you.
September 17, 2009 at 3:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
reddog (K. B. Thomas Jr.) says...
google Ron Paul Health Care.
September 17, 2009 at 6:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
reddog (K. B. Thomas Jr.) says...
utube Alex Jones TV: Obama's Socialized Health Care
September 17, 2009 at 7:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
reddog (K. B. Thomas Jr.) says...
We need some health care for the Real Estate Industry. google $15,000 tax credit on everyone's mind.
September 17, 2009 at 9:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
YY4U,so much of what you have posted is incorrect. First, you state "If we can't afford to ensure all Americans can see a medical doctor when needed," THEY CAN!!!! (and EVEN unamericans!!!) This process has gone on since before Pres. Clinton, but into the '60"s. Second, "stop building other nations and use that money to help americans". I truly understand "what" you are saying but also understand that in giving, is a type of "PR", helping others who are less fortunate then we and there are MANY out there in other nations. Have you ever stopped to consider that perhaps, we (americans) have grown accustomed, not only to the best medical care in the world but also food, housing etc. It has been pointed out by various posters, how we are donators, therefore HELPING others! THANK GOODNESS!!!! In belonging to several organizations, I am ever so greatful for the "local" businesses that help keep us afloat.
We as a nation, have made many mistakes. Let's not add to that "trend" by having "government controlled" medicine! Let's "fix" what we have without letting government have another foot in the door!
September 17, 2009 at 9:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
Although the question was posed to sandman, I say, reform, if done carefully, would handle that and what it didn't, the health care system we already have (county health dept.) would pick up. It could also use a little reform, but reform is a far more efficient way to accomplish these goals and also leaves far more personal freedoms intact.
September 17, 2009 at 10:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
reddog,
I really can't ever see your point, since I believe your business ethics to be as crooked as those of the insurance companies who are taking advantage and those of the lobbyists who try to shut out reform discussion....you all just want it your way with little regard for the other person.
September 17, 2009 at 11:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
"Careful, well though-out reform" if this is what it was then that would be good but it's not. How can it been when half of the questions brought up about the issue are dismissed immediately as racist crazy talk? It's really more than half, I was being conservative.
R.
Go Ron Paul!!
September 17, 2009 at 11:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
reddog (K. B. Thomas Jr.) says...
google Socialized Health Care---
September 17, 2009 at 11:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
YY4U, Couldln't sleep so here is my response. First, your data is OLD and as it stated, they are unable to provide valid info because of the complexity. It has been pointed out, France as #1 on the info, had 15,000 people die because of heat. Now when you consider their population, there percent wasn't so good.
Also, look at the number of people from other lands, that come to the USA because of our ability (care).
This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of ALL of your personal healthcare informations, your personal financial information, and the information of you employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures.
If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed "acceptable to the "Health Choices Administrator" appointed by Obama, there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a "tax" instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due prrocess clause of the 5th Amendment. There is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax,
The 9th Amendment provides: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights,k shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;" The 10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
link to the Constitution:
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/char...
Bill of Rights:
http://www.archieves.gov/exhibits/cha...
Sorry, tis late and I didn't feel like re-educating myself on "cut and paste"
Look at the years our "National Constitution" has stood strong. I understand the "hardships" you have had to face, believe me, you are not ALONE!!! BUT allowing our government to control, as has been said before, is ONLY the "icing on the cake"!!!!! Then it will be toooooooooo late!
September 17, 2009 at 11:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
reddog (K. B. Thomas Jr.) says...
google socialized health care Canada
September 17, 2009 at 11:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
Bill of Rights:
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/char...
September 18, 2009 at midnight ( permalink | suggest removal )
paulkersey (anonymous) says...
+1 for Ron Paul!
September 18, 2009 at 10:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
LOL
Liberals blame Bush for Katrina.
September 18, 2009 at 11:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
YY4U, First, is your first line "To blame deaths related to an act of nature on a health care system is really not fair." Act of nature?? Sorry to inform you but 9/11 WAS NOT an act of nature!!!!!
Am going to use info that "open_eyes" used on an earlier post
concerning France in 2005.
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/news/...
This was STATED by the French Parliament concerning the estimated deaths because of heat:
The new estimate comes a day after the French Parliament released a harshly worded report blaming the deaths on a COMPLEX HEALTH SYSTEM, widespread failure among agencies and health services to coordinate efforts, and CHRONICALLY insufficient care for the elderly.
France Population - 61 Million
USA Population - 300 Million+
Then you state: "counted the nursing home victims and the ones that were "put down" in the hospital. Do any of the French medical staff decide to kill their patients?" I KNOW by the various reporting that we have had some "nuts" do as you say, but that TRULY doesn't compass our entire medical system. In having some knowledge of society, I imagine that France has "nuts" also but we in the USA don't have that knowledge for we are presently concerned with our own "health care".
"Katrina"
death count and cause (flooding)
www.hurricane-Katrina.org/death/index...
September 18, 2009 at 3:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
afraid I'm coming up "0" with posted sights, sorry. Don't have time to research "why".
September 18, 2009 at 3:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
Dear YY4U, no fuse blown, only repeating what you had posted. lol
September 18, 2009 at 7:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
"YY4U, Couldln't sleep so here is my response. First, your data is OLD and as it stated, they are unable to provide valid info because of the complexity. It has been pointed out, France as #1 on the info, had 15,000 people die because of heat. Now when you consider their population, there percent wasn't so good.
Also, look at the number of people from other lands, that come to the USA because of our ability (care)."
For get France for a minute read this:
http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.co...
From this study:
"Researchers from Harvard Medical School say the lack of coverage can be tied to about 45,000 deaths a year in the United States — a toll that is greater than the number of people who die each year from kidney disease."
France Population - 61 Million
USA Population - 300 Million+
45,0000/5 = 9,000
France does not have 9,000 people a year dying from lack of coverage. In fact lets look closer at the heat wave:
cont.
September 20, 2009 at 3 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
"In France, 14,802 people—mostly elderly—died from heat, according to the French National Institute of Health.[2][3] France does not commonly have very hot summers, particularly in the northern areas,[4] but seven days with temperatures of more than 40 °C (104 °F) were recorded in Auxerre, Yonne between July and August 2003. As a consequence of the usually relatively mild summers, most people did not know how to react to very high temperatures (for instance, with respect to rehydration), and even most single-family homes and residential facilities built in the last 50 years were not equipped with air conditioning. Furthermore, while there are contingency plans for a variety of catastrophes and natural events, high heat had never been considered a major hazard and so such plans for heat waves did not exist at the time.
The heat wave occurred in August, a month in which many people, including government ministers and physicians, are on holiday. Many bodies were not claimed for many weeks because relatives were on holiday. A refrigerated warehouse outside Paris was used by undertakers as they did not have enough space in their own facilities. On 3 September 2003, fifty-seven bodies still left unclaimed in the Paris area were buried.
The main cause for the high number of deaths can be explained by the conjunction of seemingly unrelated events. Most nights in France are cool, even in summer. As a consequence, houses (being built in stone, concrete or bricks) don't warm too much and radiate heat at night. Thus, artificial air conditioning is usually unnecessary. During this heat wave, temperatures remained at record highs even at night, preventing the usual cooling cycle. Elderly persons had never faced such extreme heat before and didn't know how to react or were too impaired to make the necessary adaptations themselves, while elderly persons with family support and those in nursing homes were more likely to have someone else who could make the heat accommodations for them. This lead to statistically improbable survival rates with the weakest strata having fewer deaths than more physically fit persons; most of the heat victims came from the group of elderly persons not requiring constant medical care and living alone without immediate family.
cont.
September 20, 2009 at 3:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
That shortcomings of the nation's health system could allow such a death toll is a matter of controversy in France. The administration of President Jacques Chirac and Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin laid the blame on families who had left their elderly behind without caring for them, the 35-hour workweek, which affected the amount of time doctors could work and family practitioners vacationing in August. Many companies traditionally closed in August, so people had no choice about when to vacation. Family doctors were still in the habit of vacationing at the same time. It is not clear that more physicians would have helped as the main limitation was not the health system but locating old people needing assistance.
The opposition, as well as many of the editorials of the local press, have blamed the administration. Many blamed Health Minister Jean-François Mattei for failing to return from his vacation when the heat wave became serious, and his aides for blocking emergency measures in public hospitals (such as the recalling of physicians). A particularly vocal critic was Dr. Patrick Pelloux, head of the union of emergency physicians, who blamed the Raffarin administration for ignoring warnings from health and emergency professionals and trying to minimize the crisis. Mattei lost his ministerial post in a cabinet reshuffle on 31 March 2004."
Sounds more like a 150 year perfect storm of events to me than a something that was a direct result of insufficient health care.
September 20, 2009 at 3:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
Old data or not, we lag behind, and as to your claim that we have the best health care in the world and that people travel here, think again, its being outsourced due to costs:
"As Washington searches for ways to tame the country’s escalating health care costs, more insurers are offering networks of surgeons and dentists in places like India and Costa Rica, where costs can be as much as 80% less than in America.
Until recently, most Americans traveling abroad for cheaper non-emergency medical care were either uninsured or wealthy. But the profile of medical tourists is changing. Now, they are more likely to be people covered by private insurers, which are looking to keep costs from spiraling out of control.
The four largest commercial U.S. health insurers — with enrollments totaling nearly 100 million people — have either launched pilot programs offering overseas travel or explored it. Several smaller insurers and brokers also have introduced travel options for hundreds of employers around the country.
Overseas care can lead to price breaks of more than $40,000, not counting travel costs, for procedures like knee replacement surgery or heart bypasses. Insurers, or employers who provide their own insurance, can save between 50% and 90% on major medical claims, said Jonathan Edelheit, president of the Florida-based Medical Tourism Association. A lower cost of living and lower prices for medical supplies and drugs help drive down care costs overseas compared to American providers."
from:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2...
Best health care eh?
September 20, 2009 at 3:12 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
Tell me this, what if you insurance company said you had to hop on a plane to India for a surgery because Doctors in America where not covered in your network LOL!!!!
September 20, 2009 at 3:15 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
goodoleboy, concerning your last question. I would sincerely doubt that my coverage would send me to India for surgery. First, in your "noted" report, they are not covering traveling cost nor cost while there for the surgery. What about family? Also, what if something were to go wrong? Additional cost?
In your report they are ONLY comparing "treatment" and NOT what the cost are outside of this area. We already have this to some extent, not going to "overseas" but to other towns then Emporia for medical procedures. CURRENTLY, that is a CHOICE we are given. That choice will be out the window if this "health reform" goes into place. You won't be given an option of going town to town, no less overseas! Not even the doctor that YOU would like to treat you.
One must also consider overseas cost of living and their life styles, which in contrast to the USA, is much lower. Have you been there? In Europe, the countries are so small that they must utilize each inch. There living areas are much smaller then compared with equal income, here. Not nearly the "home owners" as the USA.
YY4U, as far as your BELOVED statement: "We're number 37", that may be the stat, BUT in reality, if we are having trouble getting doctors now, how do you think we will stand down the road? especially in "specialize fields"? Why would ANYONE make a choice to go into medicine, if this bill is past, where it is DICTATED BY THE GOVERNEMENT, what you can make? There are already many reports concerning the "shortage" in the medical field, doctors and nurses. Maybe you and goodoleboy need to reconsider and go into one of those fields,forget about the cost of education and living while going, student loans etc. Then once you are done have our government tell you exactly what you can earn and then have the additional cost of office,workers,nurses etc. I say "go for it"! I always thought we lived in the United States of American, land of CHOICES!
September 20, 2009 at 3:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
"goodoleboy, concerning your last question. I would sincerely doubt that my coverage would send me to India for surgery. First, in your "noted" report, they are not covering traveling cost nor cost while there for the surgery. What about family? Also, what if something were to go wrong? Additional cost?
In your report they are ONLY comparing "treatment" and NOT what the cost are outside of this area. We already have this to some extent, not going to "overseas" but to other towns then Emporia for medical procedures. CURRENTLY, that is a CHOICE we are given. That choice will be out the window if this "health reform" goes into place. You won't be given an option of going town to town, no less overseas! Not even the doctor that YOU would like to treat you."
Read between the lines, at savings of that magnitude you can bet that companies would foot the travel bill for you, your family, no, do they do they pay expenditures for that now? Nope! This is a whole new ballgame and with the 4th largest providers looking into it you can bet they will stop at nothing to turn a profit. Some Exec will get a massive bonus for making it happen. I trust the government more than I do corporations.
"One must also consider overseas cost of living and their life styles, which in contrast to the USA, is much lower. Have you been there? In Europe, the countries are so small that they must utilize each inch. There living areas are much smaller then compared with equal income, here. Not nearly the "home owners" as the USA."
This is irrelevant, companies are not asking people to live there, merely travel there for a procedure, same principal as when a facotry job or something along that line gets outsourced.
September 20, 2009 at 4:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
" Why would ANYONE make a choice to go into medicine, if this bill is past, where it is DICTATED BY THE GOVERNEMENT, what you can make? There are already many reports concerning the "shortage" in the medical field, doctors and nurses."
They are already underpaid, nurses are vastly undervalued, and malpractice insurance is vastly overpriced. Have you even looked at the new bill Baucus brought forth? There is no public option, having a hard time finding where you are seeing set pay scales for Docs by the government, please link me this information.
September 20, 2009 at 4:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
Funny how we spend all that money but can't pay docs and nurses what they are worth.........wonder where it is going? I KNOW!! IT HAS TO BE ACORN!!
September 20, 2009 at 5:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
If we can prevent death, why haven't we yet?
R.
September 20, 2009 at 8:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
Because its not cost effective
September 20, 2009 at 9:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
I thought the whole idea of health care reform was about compassion not about money. huh? The truth comes out.
R.
September 20, 2009 at 10:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba649
Hope this works.
September 20, 2009 at 10:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
seriously, you are correct, it IS compassion and concern that we as a nation are concerned and trying to do what is best for "we the people".
I was only trying to point out the fact that if we are having trouble getting people into the field of medicine now, what are we going to do when it is controlled by "governement"? It is my understanding that in the current "Health Care Reform" that they want to rank ALL doctors, specialized or not, in the
same "pay" structure. As in any profession, normally the more specialized you are, the higher wages.. If we go to government controlled "health care" will this not, to an extent, knock out the desire to "specialize.?
September 20, 2009 at 10:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
Your link has nothing to do with the current bills, also when I said "Because its not cost effective" I speaking in terms of the current incarnation of our health care system, it is broken and a hige drain on our economy.
"It is my understanding that in the current "Health Care Reform" that they want to rank ALL doctors, specialized or not, in the
same "pay" structure. As in any profession, normally the more specialized you are, the higher wages."
Please link me where you read this, still having a hard time finding where the bills state all doctors get paid the same wages... also something that we seem to forget since you brought up other countries, do you realize that in America being a doctor and being rich have become a synonymous term? In other countries people become doctors because they want to, not because of the money, kinda reminds you of the lawyer epidemic in this country eh? Doctors will still be very well paid, the only reason their wages are declining now is because of big insurance and high malpractice premiums, government has nothing to do with it.
September 20, 2009 at 11:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
goodoleboy, please reread the report that you posted here, it states concerning the "cost of living" DOES have an affect concerning medical cost.
You state: "read between the lines", I thought I was when I stated you had to consider ALL cost, not just the cost of a given procedure.
Sorry, I trust a corporation more then I do the government. Just take a look at what and how the government has done so far with their "control" in various areas, very poor "ranking".
September 20, 2009 at 11:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
And from your article:
"Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries."
The escalating costs and the uninsured ARE the problem, as cost escalate, more become uninsured, which places more burden on those that are insured(socialism). Too much of our GDP is devoted to health care to just "compare favorably to those in other developed countries", for what we spend we should be the envy of the world, we are not.
September 20, 2009 at 11:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
"goodoleboy, please reread the report that you posted here, it states concerning the "cost of living" DOES have an affect concerning medical cost.
You state: "read between the lines", I thought I was when I stated you had to consider ALL cost, not just the cost of a given procedure.
Sorry, I trust a corporation more then I do the government. Just take a look at what and how the government has done so far with their "control" in various areas, very poor "ranking".
COST OF LIVING MEANS NOTHING WHEN YOU OUTSOURCE! People in other countries continue to gain American jobs because they can do the same job at lesser cost because of exchange rates. please study up on the Chinese and how they have artificially inflated trade deficits with us. Our manufacturing, tech, and next our health care will head overseas if the current pace keeps up. Corporations care about one thing, PROFIT, therein lies the problem. Our government is of the people by the people and as corrupt as you might think it is at times, you hold a stake in it, you have to buy stock to hold stake in a corporation.
"Sorry, I trust a corporation more then I do the government. Just take a look at what and how the government has done so far with their "control" in various areas, very poor "ranking""
And just why is that? The government was persuaded in the late 90's to deregulate the financial markets to a point that comparable to the state it was in right before the Great Depression and guess what happened? No thanks I 'll continue to be a patriot and back my government through thick and thin then some damned corporation.
September 20, 2009 at 11:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
goodoleboy, not sure where you get that the link I posted has nothing to do with the current "reform" bill. You better go back and reread.
Also, is very EVIDENT that you follow the theory "the grass is greener on the other side". I believe that most (not all, just like any field) go into medicine because they WANT to help people, otherwise, why put oneself thru what they must do before and after they become an MD?
I do agree with your last statement and those are areas that should be checked into for they make our medical charges higher, FIX not totally change.
September 20, 2009 at 11:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
I say keep borrowing until the dollar is not worth a damn, we throw our middle finger in the air at our creditors and laugh. =) Maybe then we will get our jobs back.
September 20, 2009 at 11:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
goodoleboy, don't consider you a "patriot" because you choose "goverenment control", sounds more "socialistic" to me.
September 20, 2009 at 11:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
sandman'
Your link is about "10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care" it has nothing to do with what is in the works, if you have a new link please post and I will gladly read it. It says nothing about any of the new bills, apologies if you pasted the wrong link.
"Also, is very EVIDENT that you follow the theory "the grass is greener on the other side". I believe that most (not all, just like any field) go into medicine because they WANT to help people, otherwise, why put oneself thru what they must do before and after they become an MD?"
Negative ma'am, I follow the mantra that if changes are effected that the "grass will soon be much greener on the other side". And I believe that if one truly picks a vocation based upon what they enjoy that they will be fulfilled and patients will in turn benefit from a physician that is in the job to help people and not just for the money.
And finally:
"why put oneself thru what they must do before and after they become an MD?""
Why go through college? Why learn become a lawyer, or earn a graduate degree? Perhaps because people enjoy their fields and seek to excel in them? How many athletes do know that are satisfied?
September 20, 2009 at 11:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
"goodoleboy, don't consider you a "patriot" because you choose "goverenment control", sounds more "socialistic" to me."
Contrary to what you might think socialism and "generational theft" as McCain put it have been around for quite some time now, far longer than since thei administration came to power.
September 20, 2009 at 11:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
Just an FYI
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictio...
defines:
patriotism
as
* Main Entry: pa·tri·ot·ism
* Pronunciation: \ˈpā-trē-ə-ˌti-zəm, chiefly British ˈpa-\
* Function: noun
* Date: circa 1726
: love for or devotion to one's country
Unless there is another meaning somewhere choosing to side with government over a private cooperation is in fact patriotic, feel free to prove me wrong.....
September 21, 2009 at midnight ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
http://www.lookingattheleft.com/
goodoleboy, please note by the above article, which is long, that there are various meanings of "patriotic".
Socialized Medicine: Provision of hospital and medical services at nominal cost by means of GOVERNMENT REGULATION of health services and subsidies derivied from taxation. (mind you, REGULATION!!!)
Concerning my link, I believe it is called "preventive medicine", which in truth DOES concern "health care reform" because of cost of cutting out unnecessary procedures. The article even compares the USA to other countries in the use of "preventive" measures.
Yes, "Tort" reform is needed plus has been shown that "ACORN'" is a laugh. So much could be done to correct,
"fix", our current health care without giving up another "freedom". Remember that Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation" to SUPPORT the Contitution. Please show me anywhere in our U.S. Constitution that grants the members of Congress to regulate health care. Are you that willing to give up another "Freedom"?
September 21, 2009 at 6:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
Sobering_Video_demographic_problem_ms_061809.wmv - video/x-ms-wmv (6.9 M)
The above site doesn't have anything to do at present with "health reform" but is truely very sobering, if not scarey.
September 21, 2009 at 7:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/0...
September 21, 2009 at 7:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
What does ACORN have to do with health care? I am not defending what ACORN has become but it started out as a good thing and has became something different, here is a link that details them a bit:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090919/a...
And did you forget about Haliburton? From a dollars and sense perspective they dwarf ACORN and continue to operate, how come nothing is made about that? Or Blackwater (now called Xe)? EVERYONE is ignoring those stories and they involve dirty pool on the right and left. But again this has nothing to do with health care.
"goodoleboy, please note by the above article, which is long, that there are various meanings of "patriotic".
Socialized Medicine: Provision of hospital and medical services at nominal cost by means of GOVERNMENT REGULATION of health services and subsidies derivied from taxation. (mind you, REGULATION!!!)"
We have socialism x2 in medicine now, medicare and also every person out there that pays inflated premiums picking up the tab for the uninsured that are wrote off. Government regulation is needed, we spend too much to get such poor results, perhaps this goes to show that tying a person's health to a profit margin was a bad move to begin with?
September 22, 2009 at 1:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
"Concerning my link, I believe it is called "preventive medicine", which in truth DOES concern "health care reform" because of cost of cutting out unnecessary procedures. The article even compares the USA to other countries in the use of "preventive" measures."
Gives 10 facts about medicine in the US, and considering what we spend we should be the innovating everything and have the highest survival rates across the board, it is expected, but at the current rate health care is escalating our system will not be feasible in the enar future.
"Yes, "Tort" reform is needed plus has been shown that "ACORN'" is a laugh. So much could be done to correct,
"fix", our current health care without giving up another "freedom". Remember that Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation" to SUPPORT the Contitution. Please show me anywhere in our U.S. Constitution that grants the members of Congress to regulate health care. Are you that willing to give up another "Freedom"?"
Explain again how we are losing freedoms? It's already here! Companies dictate to us who is in network, and like I posted earlier if trends continue we will be hopping on a jet for a procedure soon enough. This is getting our CHOICE back by mandating that companies can no longer put the screws to people. Both the right and left recognize that health care is broken and that it presents a direct threat to our very livelihood from both a health and economic perspective, sounds like government acting to protect the people as it should. I repeat what you said:
"Sorry, I trust a corporation more then I do the government. Just take a look at what and how the government has done so far with their "control" in various areas, very poor "ranking"."
I'll take my government over poorly run broken private industry that cares not about your health, but about money. There are not degrees of Patriotism, there is "love for or devotion to one's country" and I'll gladly take my country and it's flaws any day over some POS corporation.
September 22, 2009 at 1:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
goodoleboy, you state:"Explain how we are losing "freedoms", it is already here! BUT, in reality, it isn't!! YOU have a CHOICE of who you want to insure you, you have a choice of DOCTOR, HOSPITAL you have CHOICES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You are so very wrong concerning patriotism. Just because someone doesn't want "socialistic medicine" doesn't mean that they aren't patriotic!!!!!!!!!! This has nothing ABSOLUTELY to do with love of country!!!!!!!! People CAN BE PATRIOTIC but yet VERSE their opinion, even tho it may be different from yours. It appears to me, that you want us all to be "zombies" and "yes" people, I DON'T!!!!!!!!! If you took the time to view the links I provided, YES! it shows that people ARE patriotic but yet versing their opinion!! You asked to prove you wrong, but I'm saying we are both correct.
Yes, "tort reform", ACORN, illegals ALL have an affect on medical reform. If those were handled in the manner that they should be, to 'FIX' our current medical system would be in "aline". Also, less people wanting something for nothing!!! Our Nation is BROKE, the printing machines are printing money that there isn't anything to "back" it with, except "borrowed" and that may run out!
September 22, 2009 at 2:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
Your definition of socialism differs from what it really is, the proposed bill has not public option, essentially the industry is still in private hands, it is no more socialistic in nature than it is already.
ACORN also has nothing to do with the health bill, tort reform and illegals do, and are addressed. I get the feeling you do not venture very far out of the right wing media circle, try to get more of all perspectives, then make your own decision. Present me some links that back up what you are saying please, it's hard to decipher where your facts start and your opinions stop.
September 22, 2009 at 3:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
I should correct myself, tort reform is not addressed, and needs to be, but the spineless Dems won't stand up to the trial lawyers.
September 22, 2009 at 3:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
"goodoleboy, you state:"Explain how we are losing "freedoms", it is already here! BUT, in reality, it isn't!! YOU have a CHOICE of who you want to insure you, you have a choice of DOCTOR, HOSPITAL you have CHOICES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
As I asked, explain please. Losing freedoms is not an answer. We have been losing choices in what is covered and what it not for years, we pay more and more and get less. This industry is just broken ma'am, it's very simple logic. As I stated before, you want to see lost freedoms? Explain how much freedom there is in an insurance company telling you to hop a plane to another country for a procedure? They already dictate who is in network and who is not, this is just the next step, and the fact that they are already looking into it just proves its on its way.
September 22, 2009 at 3:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
goodoleboy,You state: "You do not venture very far out of the right wing media circle", in reverse, I could say you do not venture very far out of the left wing media circle," especially concerning the proposed "medical reform". I have stated, that yes, there are areas that need attention but we DO NOT need
to change to government control.
I have a dear friend whose brother-in-law lives in England. He currently has prostate cancer,which has medically been determined. He has waited for six months for treatment and finally received notice that the end of November he will FINALLY see A doctor, concerning treatment. He isn't given a choice of WHO that doctor is or WHERE that treatment will take place (location), Now, eight months after being told what his condition is (which took four months for that appointment), he will start treatment. Now, if my math is correct, that is ONE YEAR after he felt there was something wrong. Is that what you want???? Government ran medical is not the answer. This is not unusual BUT usual overseas. You
do some "homework", check into what Canada has, and their people are VERY dissatisfied and wanting changes. How far do you think that cancer has spread in that 12 month period?? What will his chances be??? It has been spoken of "a death panel" with the current medical bill, we won't need to use "gas" to determine who lives and not, just delay treatment!! This man is 68 years of age. Not sure of your age or gender, but sorry, as I approach my "senior years", this is not what I want!!!!!! Is it what you want for yourself, parents, relatives?
September 22, 2009 at 4:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
I have been fortunate to have done some traveling and believe me, have seen this REPEATLY!!!! (overseas). As I stated early on this "blog", I was in Sweden visiting a foreign exchange daughter and her husband,children. Her husband took sick while I was there, so he called for an appt. Guess what? Two months down the road!!!!!!!!!! Thank goodness it was only the flu and in a couple days he was over but what if it had been serious???? Believe me they are very UNHAPPY with their "government ran" medicine!!!!!!!!!! Sure, no cost financially, but HEALTH wise??? I truly don't care what the stats. show, for as it is known, they can be what you want them to be, concerning which chart you use. That is why I posted the one I did. It DID show, that because of 'OUR' ABILITY and care, long term. Just depends what information you use. Look at the SIZE of our nation, use of "single" transportation. Sweden is the size of California,alone. We have more deaths alone from car accidents then ALL of Europe. Various reason, first, they don't use "single" transportation but PUBLIC. We are VERY accustomed to simply "jumping" into our car and going. In comparing Sweden to California, we have more highways, etc. The data needs to be the same, which I truly have my doubts concerning France, since I've been there and seen.
September 22, 2009 at 5:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
"Sure, no cost financially, but HEALTH wise???"
Add to that the fact that there IS a financial cost. There is no free lunch or free health care. If you believe there is I've got a Logjam best of box set I'll sell you. It's very rare. No seriously.
R.
September 22, 2009 at 7:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
seriously, VERY correct!!!! They may not have "insurance premiums"BUT their TAX BASE is so much higher then ours. Plus, sales tax was more then double compared to Ks. Yes, it has got to be funded and Yes, "we the people" WILL fund it with alot less choice.
September 22, 2009 at 7:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
http://ce.investorsinsight.com/CT0027...
Please review the above, very interesting.
September 22, 2009 at 7:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
http://ce.investorsinsight.com/CT0027...
September 22, 2009 at 8:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
goodoleboy,You state: "You do not venture very far out of the right wing media circle", in reverse, I could say you do not venture very far out of the left wing media circle,"
WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG, you clearly do not read what I post... example in this thead:
"I should correct myself, tort reform is not addressed, and needs to be, but the spineless Dems won't stand up to the trial lawyers."
And again wtf madam?
"Government ran medical is not the answer. This is not unusual BUT usual overseas. You
do some "homework", check into what Canada has, and their people are VERY dissatisfied and wanting changes. "
Is there a public option in the bill? Enough said.
I tire of this I really do, unless you can string together a cohesive argument backed up some factual evidence I'm done here. And btw your link is dead, so anything in it I cannot view. It is a common mistake of the far right and left to classify independents with whatever party they disassociate with. Don't make that mistake ma'am, cause I could care less about parties.
September 22, 2009 at 8:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sandman (anonymous) says...
goodoleboy, I discovered that the link I posted is "dead" and that should have been shown by me trying to post it twice. I'm sorry about that, very good sight.
Also, I'm sorry you feel that it is"a common mistake of the far right and left to clasify independents with whatever party they disassociate with" for I truly feel it is NOT the party, BUT what is being done to MY nation.
I do agree with you, I feel I have tried to prove my point by logic but evidently that is not enough for you and that is fine. You have the right to your views just as I have the right to mine. Have a good evening.
September 22, 2009 at 9 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
glarson (anonymous) says...
Moved to a forum:
http://www.emporiagazette.com/forums/...
September 23, 2009 at 2:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )