Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The problem with Health Care: "Government involvement"

page: 8
7
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by mikerussellus
 


I fail to see what that has to do with anything.

But to answer your point about the article:


According to the Hawaii Reporter, the state administration was concerned about the Keiki Care Plan’s enrollment process because it didn’t make sure that children were ineligible for Medicaid and its superior benefits.



The state of hawaii wasn't doing its job.



The screen said “Hawaii’s Budget Ax” and anchor Heidi Collins reported that, “For the past seven months it’s been the only state in the nation to offer universal healthcare for children. Now that program is being dropped.”




The program was a public-private partnership with Hawaii Medical Service Association (HMSA), which will pay to cover the children through the end of 2008.



Then it wasn't totally public plan.

The program seems to resemble MCHIP, which works just fine all throught the United States.




posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by mikerussellus
 


I fail to see what that has to do with anything.

But to answer your point about the article:


According to the Hawaii Reporter, the state administration was concerned about the Keiki Care Plan’s enrollment process because it didn’t make sure that children were ineligible for Medicaid and its superior benefits.



The state of hawaii wasn't doing its job.



The screen said “Hawaii’s Budget Ax” and anchor Heidi Collins reported that, “For the past seven months it’s been the only state in the nation to offer universal healthcare for children. Now that program is being dropped.”




The program was a public-private partnership with Hawaii Medical Service Association (HMSA), which will pay to cover the children through the end of 2008.



Then it wasn't totally public plan.

The program seems to resemble MCHIP, which works just fine all throught the United States.




They HAD to adapt to a plan to take care of the children because there wasn't enough money. They wouldv'e had to ration care otherwise.

"By the prickings of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes"

[edit on 15-8-2009 by mikerussellus]



posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gateway
reply to post by mental modulator
 


Ahhhhh no...

What planet are YOU living in?
"68% of American voters have health-insurance coverage they rate good or excellent."

I'm not too good at math, but isn't that A MAJORITY?

online.wsj.com...

[edit on 14-8-2009 by Gateway]


Yes, keep the Health Care system we have now.
Have some Tort Reform.
Good luck with that. The trial lawyers have already bought off
Obama.
We need less government not more.



posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by mental modulator

Once again it is the duty of the lender to assess the borrowers risk -


So lenders should STOP people from borrowing, because they see interest rate go down? Great logic here...


Here you show your ignorance and lack of basic economics. When prices for anything goes down people BUY more of it. Interest rates is the PRICE of MONEY. If they are distorted down, like they were by the FED, WHAT ELSE DO YOU THINK A rational person is going to do. NOT BORROW?


Do you OWN any assets? Do you own a house or a car? If interest rates are forced down will you not borrow...to get that new car or house or refinance?

Also, if interest rates are forced DOWN, WHAT'S the incentive to save...so you can get .25% on your Savings account? You going to spend aren't you? Hence the FED OR GOVERNMENT CREATED THIS BUBBLE...


By the way, as far as assessing lending, how is a lender supposed to assess risk, when he's forced to lend to those least qualified by imposed legislation like the "Community Reinvestment Act"?




Keep shilling you lobbyist you

keep, being a Central Banker apologist. Maybe Greenspan or Bernanke can give you a job, since you seem pretty good at liking the State's Boot. So keep being a shill for the murderous(warefare), stealing(taxation, imminent domain), oppressive (conscription) INSTITUTION THAT IS KNOWN AS THE STATE.







[edit on 15-8-2009 by Gateway]



posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gateway

Originally posted by mental modulator

Once again it is the duty of the lender to assess the borrowers risk -


So lenders should STOP people from borrowing, because they see interest rate go down? Great logic here...


Here you show your ignorance and lack of basic economics. People when prices for anything goes down people BUY more of it. Interest rates is the PRICE of MONEY. If they are distorted down, like they were by the FED, WHAT ELSE DO YOU THINK A rational person is not going to do. NOT BORROW?


Do you OWN any assets? Do you own a house or a car? If interest rates are forced will you not, borrow?


By the way, as far as assessing lending, how is a lender supposed to assess risk, when he's forced to lend to those least qualified by imposed legislation like the "Community Reinvestment Act"?




Keep shilling you lobbyist you

keep, being a Central Banker apologist. Maybe Greenspan or Bernanke can give offer you a job, since you seem pretty good at liking the State's Boot.

[edit on 15-8-2009 by Gateway]


Before they call you a racist (because that it seems like is one of thier favorite agendas).. what CRA did was not only force the lending to unworthy borrowers based on race card politics... but it then destroyed the entire risk model for lending money to ANYONE .. so it opened the floodgates.

Once Fannie and Freddie got thier underwriting computers in the offices of the originators, the GSE standards were practically the de facto lending standards.. and the GSEs were under orders to LOAN LOAN LOAN LOAN SECURITIZE SECURITIZE SECURITIZE SECURITIZE



posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Hello Everyone,

As I am new here I will keep my two cents to a minimum. It is my opinion that we must fully think of the argument in a whole, On one hand were saying that an individual american shouldn't pay for the next and this Reforming of our healthcare system is to much govermental control along with cost, but on the other hand Isn't this what our VETERANS recieve and we pay for?



posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox

Me Mine Me Mine.
So LET me get this straight? I work 5 to 6 days a week, 70 to 80 hours. And I'm being greedy for wanting to keep more of my OWN INCOME? Boy, you have no idea of what selfishness is.


GREED and SELFISHNESS is displayed by those that WANT to REACH INTO MY pocket so they can have what they want. To have the government COERCE me to give up a higher portion of my INCOME under the THREAT OF A GUN, OR PRISON time, for things I use to pay for me and my family, and have it go to the pockets of doctors,pharmacists, and hospitals...is not selfish.






don't complain that the younger generation does nothing but care about themselves. It is already starting to happen.
Why is it greed that people want to keep a portion of their income.

Do you think it would be okay, for me to WALK into your home, pick out things that I like and walk out? Let me guess... no you don't think it's okay for me to do that right? It's your private PROPERTY, you worked to buy those things in your home...IS NOT YOUR INCOME ALSO YOUR PROPERTY, since YOU WORKED FOR IT?



Complete and whole and equal opportunities for people, will I agree that people should keep what is theirs.

Huh? I don't' understand your point.





When there is no more discrimination of sex, religion, age, and sexual preference.
Now what are you taking about?




When there is no more good ol boys club that keep people out of jobs.
Yes, those are called UNIONS. Get rid of them.



When people are not unjustly arrested and prosecuted for the above mentioned.
Yes, so let's keep granting the STATE ever more POWER. Since they definitely are not a bunch of TASER happy, quick to shoot, jack-boot group of thugs.



When families no longer have a parent abandoning them.
Can't help you out here, these are social and cultural influences.




When people can afford to go to college based on merit and not ability to pay.
Yes, get rid of affirmative action and racial quotas and alumni preferences. Then you'll have people who merit going to college attending.




When people of minorities are not told they are not going to amount to anything in school.
Well, then if this is a problem. Don't blame the market for this, PUBLIC schools are PUBLIC schools. The problem here ONCE again, is the STATE BEING involved.




When people are not terminated based on disablility and getting hurt on the job.
Now what are you talking about? You think most of the layoffs have been ONLY on people with disabilities?




When people have access to the mental health care and crisis services they need to function.
People already have access to that. The MAJORITY of people in the UNITED STATES have insurance AND ARE OKAY with it.




When there is no more rampent undiagnosed mental illness.
Yes....there's NOT enough people dependent on legal not to mention illegal drugs. How many kids, in this country are prescribed Riddelen for so much as being on sugar highs. Don't you think we have TOO many people being placed on DRUGS, by a DRUG HAPPY pharmaceutical industry...all to happy to provide the solutions to YOUR PROBLEMS at the bottom of jar of pills.




When illegal drugs are completely eliminated.
Now you're talking about never never land....




Then, and only then, will I say your post rings true. Then that would mean that every American would have equal, unhindered access to employment and education. And your statement that what I worked for is mine, will stand true.
So I take it that you have not been allowed to go to college even though you vastly intelligent, then you were not allowed to get the job you were qualified to get because someone hired their buddy instead of you, then once you got the job, you were discriminated on because you had some disability.

Sounds like a horrible COUNTRY to me...

I guess that's why PEOPLE are coming HERE to this place FROM all over the world to not get the opportunities in education in jobs and in life...PEOPLE COME HERE to the U.S., because it is known as the LAND OF OPPRESSION.





Fact is, you may just well have at the expense of another, and you don't know it.
Seems to me that you want something ONLY If its payed for BY EVERYONE ELSE, and you don't even know it.







[edit on 15-8-2009 by Gateway]



posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by VinceP1974
 


That's right...our buddies on the left forget what the Community Reinvestment Act did, and how it distorted the credit worthiness market.

I guess it's STILL their FAULT for making loans...


Right mental modulator?



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   
An issue that no one is touching on is this.... there is one employer in this country - the United States Government that gives all of its employees VERY good health care benefits.
These benefits range from local to state to federal and they pay around $50.00 per month premiums and get 100% coverage.
Think about who these people are - the city bus drivers, the guy that repairs the county dump trucks, the book keepers at the prisons, the school teachers, the firemen and police officers (which I believe deserve it), not to mention all those who work at the offices of DSHS, Social Security, and all types of state government - then you add in the Federal employees.
This policy goes hand in hand with the unions.
At these town meetings I heard many people saying they wanted what these lawmakers had for health care - NO, it would total bankrupt the country.
You couldn't even keep the lights on at the hospital with this deal.
You have to realize that the average American who is paying $500.00 or more per month premiums is filling in the gaps for all these government employees to get this type of health care, not to mention the people who are under insured, as well as those who have absolutely no insurance at all AND the illegal immigrants too. This is why health care cost are going up.
If government keeps getting bigger then it needs more employees - more employees get more health care - more dirt cheap health care makes non government employees premiums GO UP!
The only thing I can say is Obama is right if we stay on this path - we will see this country go bankrupt - but what he is proposing is NOT the answer.
The answer would simply be for these government employees to pay their fair share and for there to be a review of their retirement packages.
We all know that we are NO LONGER wiping our asses with $100.00 any longer, so why should they continue to?
They all have us so focused on Coops and single payer and government run crap to scare and distract us from what the real issue and the real problem is. Think about it.
You figure out how many government employees are in your area and do the math. It will blow your mind!
Then before you loose all you brain cells you need to pass this on to your neighbors and friends.
Because this is not a Democratic nor a Republican issue - this is common sense. This is something that everyone can do something about.
THIS IS THE REAL PROBLEM!






top topics



 
7
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join