Health Care- Now(Passed)

Originally posted by conspiracyrus
reply to post by Janky Red

 

No jank! i had so much faith in you that you would be able to answer all my questions without having to research what i was talking about ... bleh

Though I do envy your ignorance. You can just rattle of your "equations" as an argument when you cant actually address what those numbers mean. Don't be discouraged after high school it becomes much easier.

But you will have to have the initiative to get through college. Oh yeah and hey if your parents cant afford tuition, its no big deal you can always get a student loan. But alas with healthcare reform the way its going you'll have to shell out double what your student loan costs monthly for healthcare by itself.

But don't complain to me. I was the one telling you that would happen, little did you know, of course. Yes how little you do know.

Of course - go make Karl Rove a sammy and get some shut eye.

My "equations" are alive and well

I have some numbers for you bud

724.2
455.0
560.9

maybe Karl can fix # 3 for ya buster!

[edit on 10-11-2009 by Janky Red]

Originally posted by Janky Red

I don't think people listen to me - I have you and Captain Kirk calling me Karl Marx
and ignoring the math...

It would be somewhat refreshing if you could begin at least one post with something other than a juvenile attempt at insult, but it's ok, I understand. That's just the way you folks on the left roll.

As far as Karl Marx goes, if you'd stop quoting him and setting forth his ideas, we might not make that mistake.

I do medical billing in a chiropractic office

Doesn't that make you part of the systemic problem then? It does give some insight, though. It appears that you think if the government would just take this mess over, you'd get whatever money you could charge. I see why this idea benefits you now.

I don't however, think it will work out as well as you'd like.

yes and I see how much the doctors have
to write off which only makes the insurance industry larger and MORE expensive.

I dunno. Could be. Maybe you can explain to me how DOCTOR losses, which aren't paid by insurance, increases insurance costs?

You guys seem to believe that the industry will pass on their savings to consumers.
The do not, the insurance industry increases its operation to justify higher premiums.

I must not have been clear. I don't CARE what the insurance industry does. I don't play that lotto. I DO, however, care that the government is going to get into the game and try to FORCE me to play, either by forcing me to support some hinky insurer, or by supporting hinky government insurance.

Other than that, I really don't care if all insurers simply explode, and splatter all over the walls.

It's very annoying that you think I'll jump on the bandwagon out of fear, and support your cause, by throwing mathematical magic at me and assuming that I won't examine it, but will just accept it.

You will NOT "fear" me into playing the insurance lotto.

I can show you the back door to online billing which is not in the public domain

www.ashlink.com...

Sorry, I don't typically enter computer systems through back doors.

You guys attack the person in an attempt to disqualify anything they say;
then you convince yourself that EVERYTHING that person says is false.

Nope. Never attacked you, just your flawed premises. I'm sure you've had to say something, sometime, somewhere that is correct. This discussion isn't it, though.

But at the end of the day those numbers represent the current trajectory of premium cost.

"Trajectory" is dead on, I think. you should have said that to begin with. In a trajectory, whatever rises, eventually falls, acted upon by outside forces.

These thread goers did not jump to your conclusions

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I never claimed to speak for those thread goers. They may arrive at any conclusions they desire. Not my job to think for them. I DID, however, find it interesting that you're posting your mathematical magic ALL OVER ATS, in what appears to be a copy and past of the same thing.

Originally posted by nenothtu

Convenient that the changing of colors confused conservatives so much that they
voted for BUSH 2 times.

You damn well know this country has never been a hands off deal in your whole life.
NAME ANY president in your lifetime who has not passed GOVERNMENT mandated laws.
IT won't happen the way you envision, the system is BOUGHT and as long as there are arms of government that operate free of oversight, thats how deep it goes. You and the Marxists have to wake up, you live in a world where such pure intentions will never operate as intended.

Supply and demand and the way you see it is DEAD, it has been
corrupted by the system. Where you are wrong is not recognizing who BUYS our government, unfortunately applying you intentions to this current system compounds the problem. Not only do the elite buy the government officials, but they have 100
million Americans insuring their way is unfettered using idealism as an implement.

So how do you confront or defeat TPTB if you defend their fundamental RIGHT
to control the system via "FREEDOM"?

I do not go wildly one way - I weigh both sides and then decide,

I am pro gun
Anti NAFTA
Close the FED
Pro choice
anti immigration
Pro gay marriage

this is exactly why I tried to figure out the condition of the current healthcare system. For one you guys are right, we will never see $250,000 policies because we would go broke before then, I was hoping one of you would do the math to see for yourselves.
Currently UHC is out sourcing its main call center, reducing its doctor reimbursement
schedules across the board and raising premiums. Thats business right? Well its also
your countrymen getting laid off, stiffed and ripped off all at the same time.
Those INDIVIDUALS who buy the healthcare GAMBLE are also AMERICANS -

I assumed because the trend is so wildly out of control that some people would take the healthcare issue seriously. Something that eats up more and more of the GDP that could go to job creation, investments or even healthcare itself. But no, why would we try to look ahead and address a problem that will cripple this nation EVENTUALLY
when thats freedom...





[edit on 10-11-2009 by Janky Red]

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Janky Red

I don't think people listen to me - I have you and Captain Kirk calling me Karl Marx
and ignoring the math...

It would be somewhat refreshing if you could begin at least one post with something other than a juvenile attempt at insult, but it's ok, I understand. That's just the way you folks on the left roll.

As far as Karl Marx goes, if you'd stop quoting him and setting forth his ideas, we might not make that mistake.

I do medical billing in a chiropractic office

Doesn't that make you part of the systemic problem then? It does give some insight, though. It appears that you think if the government would just take this mess over, you'd get whatever money you could charge. I see why this idea benefits you now.

I don't however, think it will work out as well as you'd like.

yes and I see how much the doctors have
to write off which only makes the insurance industry larger and MORE expensive.

I dunno. Could be. Maybe you can explain to me how DOCTOR losses, which aren't paid by insurance, increases insurance costs?

You guys seem to believe that the industry will pass on their savings to consumers.
The do not, the insurance industry increases its operation to justify higher premiums.

I must not have been clear. I don't CARE what the insurance industry does. I don't play that lotto. I DO, however, care that the government is going to get into the game and try to FORCE me to play, either by forcing me to support some hinky insurer, or by supporting hinky government insurance.

Other than that, I really don't care if all insurers simply explode, and splatter all over the walls.

It's very annoying that you think I'll jump on the bandwagon out of fear, and support your cause, by throwing mathematical magic at me and assuming that I won't examine it, but will just accept it.

You will NOT "fear" me into playing the insurance lotto.

I can show you the back door to online billing which is not in the public domain

www.ashlink.com...

Sorry, I typically enter computer systems through back doors.

You guys attack the person in an attempt to disqualify anything they say;
then you convince yourself that EVERYTHING that person says is false.

Nope. Never attacked you, just your flawed premises. I'm sure you've had to say something, sometime, somewhere that is correct. This discussion isn't it, though.

But at the end of the day those numbers represent the current trajectory of premium cost.

Your "Trajectory" is dead on, I think.

Damn right

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I never claimed to speak for those thread goers. They may arrive at any conclusions they desire. Not my job to think for them. I DID, however, find it interesting that you're posting your mathematical magic ALL OVER ATS, in what appears to be a copy and past of the same thing. (which you copied from this very thread, however I am too stupid to make the connection)

Thats right man, righties are saints and superior to regular human beings

The fact is you cannot disprove my magical math and the fact remains you won't
because you CAN'T.

You don't need to worry about the government bankrupting us, we will get it how you like it.

Enjoy the magical math! Pour up baby!

One decade from now the current rate of $15,000 a year to cover a family of four


Year - 2019

+ 131% increase as is the trend

= $34,650

Two decades

Year - 2029

+131% increase as is the trend

= $80,041

Three decades

Year - 2039

+131% increase as is the trend

= $184,894

Four decades

Year - 2049

+131% increase as is the trend

$427,105

Five decades

Year - 2059

+131% increase as is the trend

$986,612




[edit on 10-11-2009 by Janky Red]

Originally posted by Janky Red

Thats right man, righties are saints and superior to regular human beings

What IS that fallacy of debate where the debater intentionally falsifies and overstates information? I forget the technical name, but you have obviously mastered it. No where did I say OR even imply that.

It's all in your mind.

The fact is you cannot disprove my magical math and the fact remains you won't
because you CAN'T.

We've already covered that, and you've yet to support the assumptions you made in your calculations. From that fact, and from the fact that you continually deflect and misdirect the argument away from that unsupportable premise back to the math itself, which is not at issue, I am forced to conclude that you are being purposefully misleading.

You don't need to worry about the government bankrupting us, we will get it how you like it.

Enjoy the magical math! Pour up baby!

Huh? Is that your cute way of saying I've hit a nerve? If not, then the above makes no sense whatsoever.

I'm just going to delete the rest of the post. You've been told repeatedly that you are wasting space with a flawed argument, yet you continue to do so.

Repeating it, even loudly, doesn't make it so.

Unless you can come up with something new, or improved, or even sensical, then this is just going in circles, and I'm done here. You'll not lead me around in circles by the nose, without at least changing your grip.

Edit to add: I'd appreciate it if you'd re-edit the "quoted" part of your post to accurately reflect the actual quoted text, and at the very least remove the spurious section you added at the end inside parentheses. You have that as a quote by me, and it most certainly wasn't. That's misattribution, and very poor practice.

You know what? re-edit everything from the word "Your" in the trajectory sentence on down. You are misrepresenting me, and I'm not real thrilled about that. If you can't argue against what I've said, at least refrain from misrepresenting it.


[edit on 2009/11/10 by nenothtu]

The past few pages of posts are a very good example how Congress gets away with crap like this. The anger and outrage becomes deflected to each other as opposed to where it belongs.

Several posts that state the exact same thing is not debate nor is it educational. Sad that it has come to such, but that is why the government wins every time. People can not get over their own indignities and insults (as they believe them to be) thrown at them. As a whole we lose focus.

The pant-loads in DC win, because we cannot seem to hold them accountable when others are in easier reach. Sad really.

Originally posted by Beefcake
The devil is in the details. Nothing any gov't tries to do "for the People" is ever intended to benefit them so the question is WHY are they doing this. Forget about whether you like national healthcare or not one thing must always be understood...

Your gov't does not care about your wellbeing at all so why do they want you to have healthcare?

Ive thought about that..... Guess what our gov, wants to take over health insurance and pharmaceutical Billionaires for Wealthcare , they want the money in there pockets, after all, there taking da whole pie, not just a piece.
So yes we must contribit to there wealth.
www.youtube.com...

reply to post by Tyr Sog


It can be a three month wait anyways depending on what level of coverage you have.

think I am kidding? Ask any receptionist that has worked at a dr. office. Depending on what coverage you have depends on how long you have to wait till your next visit.

The most amazing thing about all of this is that they are getting paid for blatent disregard to what our country was built upon.

What a great country we live in, you get paid to destroy the very fabric that made this a great nation, "The Constitution of the United States of America".

Surreal.



[edit on 10-11-2009 by Realtruth]

reply to post by Realtruth


How exactly is this supposed to completely destroy the U.S. Constitution? It's obvious that Health Care in this country is jacked up. It needs to be fixed. So in a mandate by the people, our government decided to take on the responsibility to overhaul our nations health care system.

So is it your opinion that an insurance company should have the right to deny insurance to people based on a pre-existing condition? Is it your opinion that hospitals should have the right to charge $8 for a Tylenol?

Where in this bill is it specified that the passage of this bill is a declaration of the destruction of the US Constitution? Is it hidden in some clause somewhere? I may have missed the heading "Destruction of the US Constitution and the Dismantling of all Freedoms Clause" If you can be so kind as to point out where specifically the passage of this bill will ensure the complete and total destruction of the United States and the implementation of compelled slavery. I would appreciate it.

reply to post by Realtruth

Surreal.

No. What is surreal is the extent to which you allow your sensationalism to take you. Lets talk in facts, not what makes you feel good.

what our country was built upon

what exactly was our country built on?

Capitalism?

Well, if thats the case, then should we not, by your own logic, get rid of socialized law enforcement, fire protection, and postal services? And thats just the short list, we could name off a list of government activities that would eat up my 6500 character limit, extending into a second post.

Let's use some sound judgment on this one, shall we?


[edit on 10-11-2009 by Snarf]

[edit on 10-11-2009 by Snarf]

reply to post by angelsrforever


Your line of thinking is akin to the wal-mart haters of the world.

People have the CHOICE of going to target, lowes, menards, or K-Mart

But the majority of them choose wal-mart.

Why?

Because the majority of the people in this country spend most of their hard earned money supporting the rich and poor.

The middle class shops at wal-mart because wal-mart provides the exact same merchandise at a cheaper cost.

Wal-Mart didn't destroy Target, Kmart, or Lowes.

Those three stores did it to themselves.

Same logic applies to the healthcare industry.

You are saying "We shouldnt have a public option because it'd ruin the health insurance industry"

Are you serious?

So, we shouldn't have penicillin because it'd ruin polio?
We shouldn't have automobiles because they'd ruin the buggy industry?
We shouldn't have email, because it'd ruin the post office?
We shouldn't have ... We shouldn't have ... We shouldn't have.

No...What we SHOULDNT Have is idiot, immature people in power with the ability to make decisions to better ourselves, but choose not to out of spite of someone of a different line of thinking in order that they'd deny the rest of us the opportunity of a better life.

Seriously - do you people even think your arguments through before you go shouting them from the mountain top.

[edit on 10-11-2009 by Snarf]

[edit on 10-11-2009 by Snarf]

reply to post by whatukno


Here is a great article that lays it out logically, instead of people getting emotional about all this. Ask yourself is this Legal and Constitutional?

www.mankatofreepress.com...

reply to post by Realtruth


Probably my biggest pet peeve on this board is when someone uses another opinion to back up their own opinion. I have my opinion, but what I want is for you to back up yours with facts. A third party opinion is not necessary. If it is just your opinion that health care reform is going to destroy the fabric of our society and ruin the constitution, then by all means back up those opinions with facts.

I submit that changing health care in this country won't enslave anyone. After all the constitution provides no protections for businesses. Therefore the government can treat business however it feels. If the government feels that a business is practicing unfair bias, they can create a law that eliminates the legality of the business to be able to be biased.

I also feel that if the government is going to require every person to purchase health insurance, (something I am against) then the government better put in a public option. Because to not do so gives this niche of business an unfair market share. I personally don't like health care insurance. I don't feel it's right how they practice business. I feel that having the ability to drop someone or retroactively deny coverage is wrong. So a public option is needed. That way people are at least guaranteed some form of care. I will also contend that there is a lot wrong with the way this is progressing through the congress. I myself would like a NHS style system with everyone having the basic coverage. If however you feel that you deserve more and have the means, you should have the right and opportunity to purchase additional private insurance at your discretion.

But these are my opinions only.

reply to post by whatukno


What you feel about all this and what is actually transpiring are two separate issues.

If something is "Illegal" or against the Constitution of the United states, then it's destroying what the country was built upon.

Capitalism is a by product of the founding fathers FYI.

This is how people from opinion's with third party facts, laws, information and then they come up with comments or opinions.

So what you are actually telling us if something is Illegal and goes against the framework (US Constitution) of the United States your completely ok with it?

I would like to see some type of health care reform, but not if it is again, illegal, against the constitution and a cut and paste document that most reps have not read and do not understand.




[edit on 10-11-2009 by Realtruth]

reply to post by Realtruth


okay - we know what you're trying to say - ...but the point that you're intentionally ignoring is that what they are doing is not against the law. It's not against the constitution.

And you have yet to back anything up that you're saying with cold hard facts.

But that might be too liberal of you

reply to post by Realtruth

Section. 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Congress does have the expressed right to regulate the health insurance industry. It also has the obligation to establish a public option.

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by Realtruth

 

Section. 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Congress does have the expressed right to regulate the health insurance industry. It also has the obligation to establish a public option.

There's no "expressed right" to tinker with health insurance anywhere in that passage. I don't see "health insurance" mentioned expressly anywhere there. Neither is there any "obligation" to establish a public option. The framers weren't stupid, and had they written any sort of "obligation" into it, THEY would have established a public option so as to conform with what they had written.

I'm guessing you are trying to liberally stretch the phrase "General Welfare of the United States", but that dog don't hunt. First, the "health insurance" of nary a thing is mentioned there, and second "the United States" is an entity apart from the individual citizens thereof. That refers to the well being of the United States, which will absolutely be DAMAGED by this governnent run health care scam, due to the debts it will incur.

Perhaps you are trying to shoehorn it into the Commerce Clause, in the same way as so many other ridiculous actions have been slipped in? I'm not sure, your post was short on explanation. In any event, no where there is there mention of forcing the citizens to purchase ANYTHING, and that would be a gross distortion of the Commerce Clause.

But that's not really anything new, is it?

If they cant condense it all down into a new constitutional amendment, that is easily read by the average joe/jane, then it will not work. Just make all medical professions forced non profit. Why can the rich bribe doctors for better care?

reply to post by nenothtu


If congress did not have the authority to regulate commerce, then Bernie Madoff should never have gotten arrested. After all his victims willingly gave him money.

The same goes with the health insurance industry, here are companies that will gladly take your premiums while your healthy but have large departments specifically designed to deny you coverage whenever they possibly can. This does need regulation, if a company is to offer a service they should not have the power to deny that service to it's paying customers. Furthermore if the government is going to require everyone to have insurance, there should be no reason that it itself does not offer an alternative.

I for one will never buy insurance from a company again. It's a scam and they are cheats and they are only working in the best interest of themselves and not the public which they decided to serve. I would much rather buy into a public option than to give one penny to these insurance crooks.