Sorry about that, I guess I just never could learn to shut up when I was being preached to by a misguided idealist.

 

News From the Front

From The Washington Post: Obamacare will reduce medical services to senior citizens:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/14/AR2009111402597.html

A federal government study shows that Obamacare wll raise health care expenses in this country by $289,000,000,000:

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/67791-cms-house-health-bill-will-hike-costs-289b

It's close to Thanksgiving, folks, and the American people are about to carve this turkey up. Next we'll endure at least 3 years of hearing how the wondrous ideas of the greatest president in history were stalled by rancorous partisanism, big (healthcare) business, and the heartlessness of the opposing party. It's worth it - the socialists have been told again that this is a country of free people who defend their rights.

Don't forget the truth - it was always a shell game, and the American people didn't buy it.

 

The truth is that a single payer system or a robust public option would have lowered the cost of health care, and people like YOU opposed it. Don't you think it's disingenuous to then turn around and say that the compromise bill would increase the cost?

 

I completely disagree that a single-payer or public option system would have reduced costs. Go waaayyy back up in the thread, and you'll find the Congressional Budget Office Report on the bill that did have a "robust public option." Read the CBO report again, and you'll find that CBO also said that version would increase health care costs.

It's a shell game, it always was a shell game. No version of any of the bills has been shown by competent authority to reduce health care costs. You've ignored this simple fact in your zeal to further socialize this country.

In the words of perhaps the greatest Democrat Senator ever (and a man I greatly admire), Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "You're entitled to your own opinion. You're not entitled to your own facts."

 

As long as we finally start to fix healthcare, that's all that matters. We can always tweak it as needed.

 

I get a big kick out of it when you get all hysterical like this and spout a bunch of bullshit you're just going to have to eat later.:excited:

When health care reform passes I'll be sure to remind you of this one.

And can you hear me laughing from there prtndr? This is so impassioned so bold. Now to keep from looking like a hysterical fool all you have to do is find an example of people like me spitting on western culture and denigrate it by being objective and realistic.

This one always cracks me up. You start out trying to use statistics to prove your point but then have to contradict yourself saying in the case of cancer statistics out life style causes more cancer deaths and so the statistics don't tell the truth.

And what's really hilarious is you're going through all this hysterical rhetoric that doesn't have a damn thing to do with the health care reforms being proposed.

No Iceland is about to go tits up because they bought too heavily into the US lending and bundling practices that resulted in economic disaster. Iceland is one of the reasons for the financial bail out in the US so we wouldn't sink them economically.

Here you go again predicting something that won't happen. Let's bet prtndr. I bet health care reform gets passed. Are you taking the bet it won't?

Then why don't you follow the good advice of Daniel Moynihan and stop trying to invent your own facts.

The CBO has in no way looked at what benefits or costs would come from, a universal single payer health care system. If they did the savings would show its the only real solution to our health care problems.

 

I am a capitalist with a strong commitment to user pays philosophy, however first rate healthcare should be offered to all free at the point of use funded through taxation. If government can't do this what is it good for?

Should someone choose a more comfortable environment to receive it they should be able to access a private alternative. They should be charged the premium only with a credit paid from 'national insurance'.

The UK system does not work, I am forced to pay for the NHS through national insurance (NI tax) and if I go private I have to pay the full cost so essentially pay twice, with my NI contributions exclusively funding others health care. The US should avoid going down this path.

To fix our system we simply need to allow those opting to go private to get an NI rebate. This would encourage more people to opt for private care and take pressure off the public system which would allow better service to those who need it.

 

MM I'm going to hang onto these eloquent sentences. Other will take the rest of your statements to try and deny this simple fact. But as you say with great passion first rate health care should be offered to everyone.

 

Looks likes you got yourself another HERO..:excited::excited::excited:

 

Hell Ace MusicMachine is probably as conservative as you are. The only reason we talk to each other is because the bonds of the oilfield brotherhood are dead clamped and international. The bond of Oilfield Trash exceeds mere politics Ace.

 

And that is what really scares me the most. The tweaks by Congress, are what really fuck things up.

 

No argument MM, unfortunately the system that is being proposed will not provide basic health care, the proponents want full and equal access. To provide this the US standard will be set to the lowest common denominator.

 

Tenguy why are you always running down the United States of America? If you hate it so much maybe you should just leave. To listen to you the US can't do anything. Stop badmouthing our country.

 

That goes for me, too tenguy. When you and the other wingnuts say universal health care cannot work in the United States, you are saying that Americans cannot manage something that stumbler, Kimiko, and I have documented again and again in this thread works very well in Western Europe and the British Commonwealth. Why can they do it when we can't, tenguy?

Take your phony patriotism, and your ossified value system and move to some primitive backwater, if you can find any place more backward than the rural South, where every white person agrees with you.

 

You are exposing your bigotry again, DL. My contention that the health care system of this country is too important to trust to the proven incompetence of the government of special interest puppets and petty bureaucrats. You have absolutely no problem condemning every move that this country has made in economic and international relations, yet you feel that my condemnation of a corrupt Congress is not acceptable?

Your obvious enamored opinion of what the UK and Western Europe has done seems to ignore the warts. If you read what many folks from those areas have posted in here, you would see that it ain't all wine and roses. The post that MusicMan made was clearly pointing out that the system doesnot work as advertised in the UK, that a system strangley resembling the US system was better. A private and public industry, with benefits provided by both as dictated by the needs and means of each individual.

What has been proposed by you and others in here, is not that system, but one of compulsory participation by everyone, regardless of individual circumstances. One where the government takes over the financial end of the system, clearing the way to dictate coverage by bureauocrat.

Now just because I am not in agreement with this, does not mean that I do not think nor do I want, a system that provides health care access to everyone, based on need.

So take you rhetoric and shove it up your collective asses.

 

I support the Marshal Plan, the reasonably benign and enlightened American occupation of West Germany and Japan, the Korean War, and U.S. support for Israel. I also support the economic reforms of the New Deal, Medicare, and the environmental legislation.

Oh, yes, and I support American involvement in World War II. The United States and Great Britain could have sat out that war. I am glad we did not.

 

I am not surprised that some Canadians, Australians, and Europeans do not like their socialized health system. Some Americans have never supported Social Security and Medicare. Some wish the civil rights legislation had never been signed. What is significant, is that in no country with universal health care is there a popular demand to return to a private system.

I have posted opinion surveys that indicate that of ten countries, with the other nine having universal health care, the U.S. system is the least popular.

You have acknowledged that once an entitlement program is in place in the United States it is impossible to repeal. That is because it works, tenguy, and the voters learn that all that Republican scare talk was lies. It is sort of like learning that marijuana is not dangerous after all.

 

P.S.

I am also glad we helped the Soviet Union. When the German invasion began, Franklin Roosevelt's military advisors told him that without U.S. assistance the U.S.S.R might collapse in six weeks. If a Republican had been president I suspect the U.S. would not have helped the Russians, the German invasion would have been successful, and Germany would have won the war. The Second World War was an oil war, and we had the oil. German occupation of Russian oil fields would have changed that.

 

You look at it your way, I look at it my way.

It not that entitlements are permanent because they work, it is because they are "entitlements", elements of public fund dispersal that are written into law by career politicians. The only way to cut entitlements is to rewrite laws, something that the career politician is wont to do.

Temporary aid to the needy is charity, chaining the needy to programs is not charity.

 

Here's an amusing story about the health plan offered by the Republican National Committee (RNC) to its own employees. Turns out the coverage includes abortion services, and has since 1991.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29456.html

Of course, the RNC is now going to act quickly to end this practice, and the appearance of abject hypocrisy engendered by it.

But NOW it turns out that the RNC policy includes....wait for it....DEATH PANELS!! That's right, boys and girls, the RNC policy includes "end-of-life counseling".

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/16/804482/-Does-the-RNC-Want-to-Kill-Granny