It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Opinions Turn Favorable On Health Care Plan

page: 4
22
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   
And the point I was trying to make with this thread plays out. Another poll shows a reversal of the OP numbers.


P oll Opinions on Health Care Differ



By a 49-40% margin the Gallup poll shows support for the new bill. In a near reversal of those figures meanwhile more oppose than favor health care reform by a 50-38% margin according to Bloomberg.

Interestingly there is a strong similarity between the surveys that contradicts the widely different results between the two. Both Gallup and Bloomberg polled just over a thousand adults nationwide, meaning each gathered information from a virtually identical sample size and used the same classification of citizens. One potentially important difference comes in the time span each survey was conducted. Gallup was able to poll over a thousand individuals all on Monday, March 22nd. That was the day after the House secured enough votes for passage Sunday night. The Bloomberg release on the other hand collected responses over four days from March 19-22nd. Hard to say which poll is a more accurate reflection of the public but the Bloomberg survey failed to account for the immediate reactions of the country in full whereas the Gallup poll, done the day after, may have been bogged down by instant responses to the momentous event.


Polls this close can not possibly reflect the will or opinions of the nation.
What we need to take from this is that the country is split. About half and half. The half that wants health care reform is getting it. The half that doesn't want it is going to be disappointed, but that's the way it goes. You can support violent revolution or suck it up and realize that you live in a country of people with different opinions and you're not always going to get your way. Take it like an adult. Or throw a temper tantrum like a child. It's up to you.

[edit on 3/25/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]




posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Opinion polls only expose the gullibility factor within the population.

Opinions are worthless, facts are everything and the overwhelming fact no poll has fully addressed is that this health care reform bill, when fully implemented, will be nearly 100% unfavorable to virtually all Americans.

By then, polls will be entirely irrelevant as the time has passed to stop it, along with the bill.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
Opinion polls only expose the gullibility factor within the population.


It's funny how so many people are screaming and crying that Congress didn't vote with the opinions of the gullible majority and therefore the government should be overthrown or some crap. Then in the next breath, they say opinions are worthless... If the gullible majority's opinion is worthless, then why is it so important that Congress listen to the opinions of people, majority or otherwise?




Opinions are worthless, facts are everything and the overwhelming fact no poll has fully addressed is that this health care reform bill, when fully implemented, will be nearly 100% unfavorable to virtually all Americans.


Sorry, but that's your opinion, not a fact. And didn't you just say that opinions are worthless? Does that include yours? Or just those with whom you disagree?

This position makes no logical sense whatsoever to me. But then, this isn't about logic, is it? It's about a group of people not getting their way, and throwing a temper tantrum because another group DID get their way.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by sos37
 


Don't waste your time, the reality of the health care bill will be hitting everybody in their faces soon enough.

People think this bill is universal and that people with not income will be getting money for the government for fee care

Reality check,


The bill is neither universal health care nor universal health insurance


Still 24 million of poor uninsured will still be uninsured or unable to use the health care because out of pocket expenses, medications and deductibles.


Many Massachusetts residents forgo health care because they can’t afford it.

A 2009 study by the state of Massachusetts found that:

•21% of residents forgo medical treatment because they can’t afford it, including 12% of children
•18% have health insurance but can’t afford to use it


Many poor will have an insurance pay by the tax payer but they will not afford to use it.

firedoglake.com...

Who wrote the HCR? and is still working in it?Well we know where the baucus bill came from


This bill is almost identical to the plan written by AHIP, the insurance company trade association, in 2009.

The original Senate Finance Committee bill was authored by a former Wellpoint VP. Since Congress released the first of its health care bills on October 30, 2009, health care stocks have risen 28.35%


People needs to stop trusting the government whores.



You see, it's the incenuation that conservatives DON'T have the people's best interests in mind that gets me ticked off.

I'm NOT against health care reform at all - but I want it to happen so that it doesn't RUIN this country financially!! As I've said before, what good is Health Insurance if you don't have a job?



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

The half that doesn't want it is going to be disappointed, but that's the way it goes. You can support violent revolution or suck it up and realize that you live in a country of people with different opinions and you're not always going to get your way. Take it like an adult. Or throw a temper tantrum like a child. It's up to you.

[edit on 3/25/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]


I'll remind you of these very words the next time gays are denied the right to marry in a popular vote. How's that?



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


If you remove all of the crap from that bill I'd support it, there are some elements worth keeping.

About 1,500 pages of new laws and taxes that are unnecessary, destructive and unconstitutional.

This isn't about one side that didn't get there way... It is about what is right and what is wrong.

One day even a clouded mind like yours will be able to clearly see what is and isn't.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by sos37
I'll remind you of these very words the next time gays are denied the right to marry in a popular vote. How's that?


You still don't understand the difference between voting on legislation and Majority Rules, Minority Rights, do you? Not my problem. Go ahead and remind me. I'll remind you about Majority Rules, Minority Rights... AGAIN.


Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
If you remove all of the crap from that bill I'd support it, there are some elements worth keeping.


Too bad you weren't involved in writing it to your specifications. Maybe you should run for office so you can have more of an input... It's an idea.



About 1,500 pages of new laws and taxes that are unnecessary, destructive and unconstitutional.


Interesting opinion. I happen to agree that some is unnecessary and I'll even go so far as to say that some of it might be destructive, but I have yet to see how it's unconstitutional. Of course, I'd need a constitutional lawyer without a vested interest to prove it before I believed it. The ATS self-proclaimed Constitutional experts aren't gonna do it for me.



This isn't about one side that didn't get there way... It is about what is right and what is wrong.


You do know that "right and wrong" is subjective, don't you? And therefore just another opinion...



One day even a clouded mind like yours will be able to clearly see what is and isn't.


Thanks for the hopeful outlook!



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by sos37
 


I voted for Obama, I vote for the hopes of a Universal health insurance with a public option that is what Obama promised to all of us.

Then the private interest got involved, the made their bill and they imposed the mandate, penalties and fees in the bill, then that is the bill we are to get.

And Obama will approve.

In my eyes Obama now has become a government whore to private interest.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Interesting opinion. I happen to agree that some is unnecessary and I'll even go so far as to say that some of it might be destructive,


Yet you foolishly (along with millions of others) support it despite being able to see how it can be destructive?

This isn't a time for partisan bias, you really need to set that aside and study this more, apparently you are not a completely lost cause.

If any aspect of any piece of legislation can be seen as unnecessary or destructive then regardless of your partisan stance, it should not be supported or defended.

This bill is wrong, and could have been fixed if it hadn't been for corruption and partisan agendas.

If American leaders in government can't rise above these tactics then we are doomed.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by sos37
I'll remind you of these very words the next time gays are denied the right to marry in a popular vote. How's that?


You still don't understand the difference between voting on legislation and Majority Rules, Minority Rights, do you? Not my problem. Go ahead and remind me. I'll remind you about Majority Rules, Minority Rights... AGAIN.


I see you trying to justify WHAT YOU AGREE WITH. You claim gay rights is a constitutional issue.

Opposition to Health Care Reform IS THE SAME DAMN THING!!!!!!

10th Amendment. Just because YOU don't think it's a Constitutional issues doesn't mean it isn't. That's up to a COURT to decide.

Sorry, but you are blatantly trying to justify ONLY WHAT YOU AGREE WITH and then shooting down that which you don't agree with instead of saying - "yeah well, half the country doesn't approve of gay marriage. The other half will just have to suck it up and live with it."

That makes you a political hypocrite.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 10:53 AM
link   
I am still waiting for those favorable opinions....

55% Favor Repeal of Health Care Bill

Just before this bill passed 54% were opposed to it and now after the signing, 55% want it repealed.

Just sayin'.

60% of likely voters think that reform will increase the deficit and 81% believe that the costs of this program will be higher than projected.

Reform should have been handled on a smaller scale one step at a time.
Tort reform
Preexisting conditions
Interstate commerce for healthcare insurance. Hell, structure it more like auto and homeowner insurance.
blah blah blah...

[edit on 25-3-2010 by jibeho]



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa
reply to post by whiteraven
 



Conservatives love to demonize their opponents by name calling; socialist, communists and tulipwalkers come to mind.

Old #5....they should review this www.abovetopsecret.com...

Now let's all get ready for the "the libs do it too" responses.



Both sides ARE doing a great job of demeaning each other, I honestly expected a little more from you. It's not like either side is going to be in the mood to work with the other, regardless of who is in power. One can only hope for a real Third Party that can banish both sides of the extremes to the wayside.

Too bad that won't happen.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 


You make a great point. This bill and the way that it was created and passed will certainly guarantee that there will be NO bipartisan cooperation for as long as Obama is in office. He drew a line in the sand that is far to great to cross.

I will expect some serious mudslinging in the months and years to come.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by sos37
 


Personally I think its a sad state that humans have not evolved beyond Animalistic Survival of the Fittest.

Not to derail the thread - but - I'd prefer to support early prevention - as in zero population growth. Free birth control - free condoms - free abortions - - - and education classes to break cultures & beliefs that think number of children proves virility or god's will.

Other then that - I think its insane not to have national (even global) health care to take care of already living and breathing humans.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by sos37
 


Personally I think its a sad state that humans have not evolved beyond Animalistic Survival of the Fittest.

Not to derail the thread - but - I'd prefer to support early prevention - as in zero population growth. Free birth control - free condoms - free abortions - - - and education classes to break cultures & beliefs that think number of children proves virility or god's will.

Other then that - I think its insane not to have national (even global) health care to take care of already living and breathing humans.



Well I hope you're not implying that I'm not wanting to take care of our citizens as far as health care coverage, because 1 page back I posted that I most certainly was. I am opposed to doing it irresponsibly. I think if it's going to add half a trillion dollars to the deficit, cause small businesses to fail and cost more jobs than it ever creates then it's being done irresponsibly and recklessly.

I know the CBO said it would reduce the deficit, but that's a bold-faced LIE. One of many that the Democrats used to shove this bill down our throats.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
Yet you foolishly (along with millions of others) support it despite being able to see how it can be destructive?


I have said many times what I think about this bill. There's a lot wrong with it. But I do support the passage of it because without it, we would NEVER get health care reform. And there are people suffering and dying NOW because they don't have insurance and access to health care. It's a not-so-attractive step on the stairway to true health care reform. If we toss it aside, we'll never get up the stair. We'll never get to the NEXT step, which is in the works in Congress as we speak.



This isn't a time for partisan bias, you really need to set that aside and study this more, apparently you are not a completely lost cause.


I am not now, nor (in my 52 years) have I ever been a member of a political party. I have voted for members of just about all political parties. I do NOT support political parties. They are a pariah in this nation, IMO. I support people and issues. So you can take your partisan sermon somewhere else.




If any aspect of any piece of legislation can be seen as unnecessary or destructive then regardless of your partisan stance, it should not be supported or defended.


As I TRIED to illustrate before, no one is ever going to agree 100% with ANY legislation or ANY politician on every issue. If ANYONE expects Congress to come up with a sweeping health care reform bill that suits them 100%, they are going to be highly disappointed. There are just too many minds and forces at work to expect perfection. I believe, when so many minds and desires are involved, that compromise is the key to progress.

I am willing to not get everything I want in order to move toward something that will be better for this country. It's like a marriage. I don't approve of my husband 100%. I don't get everything I want from him all the time. We are two people. We each have wants, desires and expectations from our relationship. Imagine the different forces when we're talking about a country full of people! In both cases, compromise is the key to success.



Originally posted by sos37
I see you trying to justify WHAT YOU AGREE WITH. You claim gay rights is a constitutional issue.


This thread is not about gay rights and I won't indulge your continued effort to derail it. I'm sorry you don't understand the difference between Congressional legislation and basic human rights, but that is your problem and I'm not inclined to educate you further here. Read a book.


Originally posted by jibeho
This bill and the way that it was created and passed will certainly guarantee that there will be NO bipartisan cooperation for as long as Obama is in office.


What are you talking about? That was already guaranteed! Where have you been? How much less can Republicans support Obama than they have since he announced his candidacy?
They cannot be MORE partisan than The Party of No.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Uhhh!! The Republicans were constantly shut out of the HCR creation process. With the exception of one public meeting/photo op with Obama. Any and all ideas were shot down in flames. The republicans had good ideas that were not incorporated into this mess. It is a give and take game in DC. Why should the republicans support Obama's quest for a Progressive Utopia created by former Hippies.

Where is the ability to shop across state lines for healthcare insurance?? Pretty simple if I am going to be permitted by the govt. to keep my current Cadillac plan that I pay greatly for. But NO! The govt. will slowly start sucking the life out of private insurance companies so the point is moot.

Where is the tort reform??

[edit on 25-3-2010 by jibeho]



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
Uhhh!! The Republicans were constantly shut out of the HCR creation process.


Not true. There were over 200 Republican provisions in the HCR bill.

HCR Sent Back for Revote


The house is voting on it again!

It's the "fixes", right?

[edit on 3/25/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by jibeho
Uhhh!! The Republicans were constantly shut out of the HCR creation process.


Not true. There were over 200 Republican provisions in the HCR bill.

HCR Sent Back for Revote


The house is voting on it again!


200 or 2?


According to an Associated Press report, Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, said “Republicans consulting with the Senate parliamentarian [Alan Frumin] had found ‘two minor provisions’ that violate Congress’ budget rules. The provisions deal with Pell grants for low-income students.”



“under the reconciliation rules, provisions in the [healthcare reform] bill must directly affect government spending or revenues.”

“The risk for Democrats in a parliamentary challenge is that Republicans could knock out key provisions of the legislation, or win a decision that upends mechanisms Democrats rely on to pay for the measure,” the NYT reported, adding that there is a third, unknown issue Senate Parliamentarian Alan Frumin is reviewing.



“Manley said those two provisions [totaling 16 lines of text] will be removed from the bill, and he expected the Senate to approve the measure and send it to the House,” the AP reported. “Manley said Senate leaders, after conversations with top House Democrats, expected the House to approve the revised measure.”


Maybe I need new bifocals but I fail to see mention of 200 republican provisions. Not a single major Republican idea was included in this legislation.

[edit on 25-3-2010 by jibeho]

[edit on 25-3-2010 by jibeho]



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
Maybe I need new bifocals but I fail to see mention of 200 republican provisions.


Well, The Individual Mandate is a Republican Idea



"The truth is this is a Republican idea," said Linda Quick, president of the South Florida Hospital and Healthcare Association. She said she first heard the concept of the "individual mandate" in a Miami speech in the early 1990s by Sen. John McCain, a conservative Republican from Arizona, to counter the "Hillarycare" the Clintons were proposing.

McCain did not embrace the concept during his 2008 election campaign, but other leading Republicans did, including Tommy Thompson, secretary of Health and Human Services under President George W. Bush.

Seeking to deradicalize the idea during a symposium in Orlando in September 2008, Thompson said, "Just like people are required to have car insurance, they could be required to have health insurance."

Among the other Republicans who had embraced the idea was Mitt Romney, who as governor of Massachusetts crafted a huge reform by requiring almost all citizens to have coverage.

"Some of my libertarian friends balk at what looks like an individual mandate," Romney wrote in The Wall Street Journal in 2006. "But remember, someone has to pay for the health care that must, by law, be provided: Either the individual pays or the taxpayers pay. A free ride on government is not libertarian."


But there are over 200 amendments in the HCR:



“That while the bill may not get Republican votes...it is bi-partisan in having over 200 Republican amendments,” said House Speaker Pelosi, a representative from California, during her remarks before the vote.


Source

Am I misunderstanding something here? I'm honestly confused.



[edit on 3/25/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join