Well I'm tiered of bills being written behind closed doors and being passed that help the wrong people, I'm tiered of the bought of media telling us what to buy, what to fear, what to believe, and how we should live our lives. I'm tiered of the constant lies and minipulation by the banker controlled government towards the American people. I'm tiered of wars, the infringement of our freedoms and liberty's. I'm just tiered of the whole system it needs to be wiped clean.
The section of Article I, Section 8 you refer to is part of a preamble to some twenty enumerated powers intended to restrict the Fed from encroaching on the States, not a mandate to do anything, as you suggest.
Hmmm, lets see Lincoln and more perfect union you got that from Obama more perfect union speech in 2008, right? If so it seems what youre inclined to think about the framers intent in questionable.
Im inclined to think people like Madison would be disappointed to see that in attempting to fashion a sufficiently strong federal government they had failed to protect us from that same power. A failure they new could happen especially if Americas people were inclined to abandon knowledge of their history and the protection that knowledge might provide.
With regard to if we on the road to a financial crisis due to debt and deficit I defer to Obama. Get a transcript from the latest health care reform debate, theres no if in his view.
I consider myself politically alert enough to get by. Your account regarding which party did what relative to spending is OK by me. With regard to which party I might support as I said earlier and I repeat Ive been around long enough to see America decline. That includes both parties as well. In my view both parties are filled with people so rabidly focused on winning they dont realize they are damaging our future.
As far as acting out of self interest there are far too many people in my opinion doing exactly that already, SEIU, AFL-CIO, Congressmen and Senators and business interests all come to mind. What ever happened to ask not what your country can do for you?
Finally I agree something needs to be done about health care cost growth, just not by the federal government. It makes no sense on one side to argue the federal government should take Americas health care system over and on the other side acknowledge its influenced by special interests.
To be fair to you I'm one of those crazies who still reads about our constitution. I'd guess it's been 30 years since the first time I read Locke, Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers.
I have no love for or faith in either party. I've lived long enough to witness a gradual decline in our county that you apparently do not see.
According to David Walker (former US comptroller) our country is at a financial cross road.
I congratulate you on your familiarity with the Constitution. This means you are undoubtedly aware of the Article I, Section 8 clause mandating Congress provide for the "general Welfare of the United States." Lincoln described the Constitution as a blueprint for future Americans to follow, always working toward a more perfect union. I'm inclined to think that many of the Framers would have agreed with him. (continued)
This would suggest that if your financial concerns are valid, you would, if from enlightened self-interest alone, support the party that has proven to be the most fiscally responsible.
I think it should also be noted that the Democratic healthcare bills all reduce the deficit while that presented by Republicans significantly increases the deficit.
Now, technology and medical advances enable us to fulfill the Framers' mandate to provide for the general Welfare as never before.
Our nation may well be at a financial crossroads. If so, such a plight makes it imperative that we pass healthcare. The US spends a stunning high amount of its GNP on healthcare when compared to the nations of Western Euope, all of which have single-payer systems and obtain better results than we do. (continued)
If you have been politically alert for the past three decades, you will have noticed that the executive up until 2009 has been controlled by two Democrats (Carter and Clinton) and three Republicans (Reagan, GHW Bush, and GW Bush). When it came to the deficit, the two Democratic presidents did the most to restrain it. Clinton actually left office with the largest surplus in US history. The deficit grew rapidly under GOP presidents. (continued)
The point of my previous post was our form of government is volatile by design. Each election cycle can bring dramatic changes in policy as seen by the Clinton then Bush and now Obama administrations. Our system also seems overly susceptible to special interests be they unions, business interests and/or vocal minorities.
Our government is less volatile than you may imagine. No democratic republic is so long-lived as ours. Only one true constitutional crisis ever truly threatened to ruin our nations, namely the attempted revolt of slave-holding states, and that crisis lead to much needed reform (13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments.) While our Constitution defines us as a liberal democracy, it is notoriously difficult to change. Don't confuse political swings with a formal change in our form of government. (continued)
One of the special interests to which our government is especially susceptible is corporate heathcare insurance. To contrast its goals with those of unions, whose monetary resources are exceedingly less, unions have sought the elimination of child labor, ending physical abuse of female laborers, establishment of the 8-hour work day, improved safety conditions, fair wages, and so on, corporate goals are decidedly self-interested and commonly detrimental to the public interest.
According to the CBO there are two drivers for growing health care cost.
First, 70 million aging baby boomers are beginning to retire. Second, expensive high technology medicine (think arthroscopic surgery vs. a plain old scalpel). Go to the CBO web site reports to congress for your self.
The question isnt will the health care program pay for itself (I personally doubt it). In the 1930s Roosevelt couldnt know what would happen with his grand experiment in creating a nationwide entitlement program.
The problem with Sherrod Brown and his progressive pals is they havent learned they cant control everything as much as they would like. Why expand the failed policies of the past as the progressives are so fond of saying.
Governments in a host of nations including Canada, the UK, and virtually all Western Europe have proven that they can deliver better health care at a lower cost. National healthcare programs are not "failed policies." They survive and thrive across the world, and these nations, having experienced American-style in the past, have no desire to give up their single payer systems and return to the tenderness of health insurance corporations.
It is with this in mind that I am mistrustful of the expansion of federal control of the health care system. There is no doubt we have to address health care costs. Never the less there is nothing about the nature of our federal system that encourages me to put them in charge. While some want the public option I want another option.
The federal government is the best vehicle for securing healthcare reform. As it now stands, only states have powers sufficient to regulate the standards by which insurance companies must abide within their jurisdictions, and Republicans are eager to strip the states of even these regulatory limits. The federal government has demonstrated remarkable successes in large tasks -the military, interstate highways, elimination of infectious diseases, air and naval navigation, and so on. (continued)
Be assured that the bill endorsed by those who seek a public option will not rob you of the option of selecting private insurance if that is indeed your desire. You can go to congress(dot)org and read the various bills for yourself.
Sherrod Brown is explaining the facts of the matter regarding Senator Judd Gregg. Insurance companies are doing just fine. We don't have to worry about them. The sick state of our health care system is hurting everyone (except health insurance and pharmaceutical CEOs). It is hurting our nation as a whole, because we are a sicker nation. That costs more. It hurts businesses(lack of productivity and high premiums), it is hurting our chances of competing with other nations for market share.
commonjoe ~ we are the richest country in the world and we pay twice as much for care that 1/5 don't have access to and 1/2 can't fucking afford. the health care it self is excellent , probably the best. so why does it suck so bad? because all the idiots who are afraid of the government getting between them and their doctor allow it to happen with private insurance at 6 TIMES THE COST! who do you think is paying for the millions the insurance industry is dumping right now? hint. WE ARE.
@tomitstube - First, everyone has access to care. Hospitals have to treat people. Second, affordability is an issue, but what has cause health care costs to increase so much?
You are blaming the increases in the cost of CARE on the insurance companies. The cost is determined by providers, not insurance companies. Nearly half of the people are on Medicare, Medicaid, or some other government heath insurance. The single biggest insurer is GOVERNMENT. Who do you think is paying for that?
@CommonSenseJoe ~ "So whats your answer? Socialized medicine where you the government will determine your care for you".
where did you get "determine" from? you're just making this stuff up aren't you? it's actually private care that's making decisions about your care. you aren't paying attention are you?
is there ANY chance conservatives will ever debate an honest dialogue about health care? this whole anti-government stuff is lame and getting old.
@tomitstube Let's have an honest dialogue about healthcare. The reason healthcare costs have skyrocketed is Medicare and Medicaid. These are government run healthcare programs that DO NOT PAY THE FULL COST OF CARE PROVIDED. This cost is shifted to private insurance companies through increase costs. Tell me, what will happen when everyone is on a government program and there is no one to shift the cost too?
the only way this bill could reduce the deficit is if it taxes they shit out of us, and then that money is used to reduce debt instead of go to health care. So even if this fuckbag is right, it's still irresponsible because they are taxing us and that money is not going to services.
Um, no. Health care spending RIGHT NOW is adding to the deficit. If we CUT spending, we reduce the deficit. Is it also irresponsible that the insurance companies are charging us tens of thousands in premiums and NOT spending that money on "services", like the health care their policyholders need? Instead, they are spending BILLIONS on advertising, lobbying, and executive pay - while people WITH insurance can't get the care they need?
No one has proved that the insurance companies are not paying their claims. They are legally bound by their contracts. If you want to change the law to make those contracts clearer then I am all for that. The rising cost of healthcare is caused by the government, not the insurance companies.
LOL.. You are one sad, brainwashed zombie. Keep praying to your corporate gods, I'm sure they'll answer....You seem to be confused about the nature of insurance companies. They are MONOPOLIES. How does that sit with your "free market" ideals? Again, INSURANCE is not "health care". If not for insurance companies, ACTUAL health care costs would be much lower. Paying a middleman is always more expensive than paying the actual source, because the middleman takes a cut off the top.
I am not confused. If you think they are monopolies then you should break them up by improving competition. The rules and regulations make it almost impossible for new companies to challenge the bigger ones.
So the cost of fixing your car after an accident is determine by the car insurance companies? Do you even know how medical insurance got started in the first place?
I don't THINK they're monopolies, they ARE monopolies. Antitrust exemptions... hello? Hopefully the final bill will repeal those exemptions, but that isn't enough to bring competition to the industry - when the existing leaders already have the market cornered. Auto insurance isn't comparable, it functions completely different from health insurance. Auto ins. cos don't take a cut off the repair bill, health insurance DOES.
Sure it is. No insurance company gets a cut from the providers. They negotiate lower prices if they can, but that is not a "cut". Blaming insurance companies for the high cost of care is stupid. It is the government who have driven up the price of healthcare.
You're so wrong, it isn't even funny. look, the insurance companies make a PROFIT off customer premiums (the premium is how much you pay for health insurance, or the monthly payment), so yes, they are taking a "cut" of your money. The profit they make is money that ISN'T being spent on actual health care. Blaming insurance companies for the high cost of INSURANCE (not health care, as insurance doesn't provide care) isn't stupid, it's FACT. The ins. companies charge whatever they want to.
The profit margin on health insurance is about 4%. So at best, their "cut" as you put it is 4%. The problem is the high cost of healthcare. The question is why is healthcare cost spiraling upward. The answer is that the government fails to pay the full cost of treating Medicare and Medicaid patients. Providers must make up the loss by shifting it to other patients and their insurance companies.
Insurance companies cannot charge whatever they want because if there is competition.
4% of how much? 4% of $100 may not be much, but what's 4% of 600 billion dollars? Kind of puts it in perspective, doesn't it? Healthcare costs are "spiraling upwards" because of the UNINSURED, who can't pay their medical bills. Those costs get passed on to everyone else (they don't just magically disappear when nobody pays for them, you know). That's why UNIVERSAL coverage is important. If everyone is covered, everyone's bills get paid and costs come down.
No, you are wrong. The uninsured are not the majority of the problem. Medicare reimbursement is less than 80%. Medicaid is less than 60%. More than HALF the people are on government insurance plans. If it was just the uninsured, then a mandate would fix the problem.
4% is a still a small profit margin regardless whether it is $100 or a billion.
I didn't say they get a cut from the PROVIDER, they get a cut from YOU, from the premiums you pay them. The less actual health care they allow you to receive, the more money they make.
You can get all the healthcare you want. The insurance company is only one means of paying for it. If you don't like them, don't buy insurance and run the risk yourself.
I think you mean, "You can get all the healthcare you can AFFORD", which for many people is NONE at all. Affordable insurance means affordable HEALTHCARE for those who are currently unable to scrape together several hundred dollars for ONE doctor visit. Having insurance reduces the cost when health care services are needed so you don't end up paying $20,000 to have a baby. Without insurance, who can afford that?
You are beginning to understand the problem. The reason insurance costs so much is NOT because the insurance companies are ripping you off. A 4% profit is not an outrageous margin. The real problem is the actual cost of healthcare itself. If you can lower the cost of the care, you will lower the cost of the insurance you have to pay for that care. The heart of the problem is WHY is healthcare costs going up so fast? The answer is simple. The government fails to pay providers enough.
No, the problem is the uninsured. That's what drives up costs, not the government. 4% is subjective. 4% of WHAT? 4% of a dollar? Or 4% of hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars? Yes, insurance is a ripoff. They charge you tens of thousands of dollars a year and then DENY you coverage when you actually need it. That's how they make their money, by DENYING health care to sick people. And you support that? You're despicable.
IF insurance companies are wrongly denying coverage then that should be addressed. However health insurance is a contractual agreement between the insured and insurer. If you don't like your insurance company, sign up with another. There are lots of them out there.
Of course they do. It is not a cut. It is the price I pay to have insurance. To transfer the risk from me to them. They are there to make money and provide a service. If you don't like the service, don't buy it. Better yet, all these rich liberals could start their own health insurance company and compete with them. How billions do the Kerrys, the Kennedys and such have among them? Start a company and provide the service, and prove that these others are a rip off.
btw oside, what the right has sabotaged in health care reform is no longer "universal care". and now these hypocrite repubs are blaming the left for their own gutting of what could have been beneficial to everyone. you, me, the federal deficit, hospitals, doctors, patients... an absolute travesty what conservatives have done. i only hope the public sees thru this blatant heresy and votes these corporate sellouts out of office.
It was never intended to be universal care. It was intended to be what it is, a government takeover to cover up the fact that Medicare is going broke. Nothing in the bill lower healtcare costs. In fact, it will raise them because of the Medicare cuts.
did you not read my initial post? i am not for greedy insurance companies or the politcians they hold in their pockets. nor do i want state run health care. it is a flawed system. tell me, how is this bill in its 'ungutted' form benficial? how does it lower the deficit, amongst other 'obvious' benefits.' as an independent i always read posts on how liberals have the market on 'facts' and 'knowledge' cornered so tell me how is this 2000 page bill beneficial?
and when you tell me how this 2000 page bill is beneficial i want you to tell me which section, page, paragraph, sub-section, etc describes the benefits laid out in that certain part of the bill. after all, in order to have 'facts' on your side you must first have an absolute, clear and thorough understanding of what you are presenting. as a enlightened liberal i'm sure you would agree and would be more than happy to comply with such a simple request.
@osidehooligan ~ i don't understand your rant. are you wanting me to explain the bill now, or how it would work in a single payer system. SEE MEDICARE.
"beneficial"? simple math. private insurance takes 35% without providing a single product or service, chooses who lives or dies, won't insure 1/5 the population, 1/2 is under-insured.
the failure is what we have now. a colossal FAILURE! status quo, the current give away bill is suicidal. i told you i don't want this senate crap!
and again, i do know the insurance companies are nothing but thieves. but this so called 'health' bill which you so wholeheartedly support in its whole form you do not even know about it. that's the point i'm making. you support something that you know nothing about.
lol, "death panels" are making a strange comeback in the last few days. even after politico-fact checkers gave "death panels" the biggest lie of 2009.
a little like republicans and conservatives in a nut shell, they can be proven wrong in 14 different ways, but they remain undeterred. it's all part of dubya's real "doctrine". repeat lies until they're accepted as fact by your ignorant base. an adopted doctrine by palin, beck, bachman, an dimbaugh.
People lets stopp feeding the troll common sense joe. There is no use to debate with him he has no facts and no matter how many times you prove something to him he will not change his mind.
What's scary about this whole health system overhaul is that in the same way the govt forced mortgage companies and banks to give loans so everyone has a home so then the govt may do the same to make sure everyone is covered. All I can see is another near total economic meltdown with health care just as in the housing market. We don't need greedy insurance companies nor do we need universal health care. I'd say not for profit co-ops would best serve us all.
@osidehooligan ~ nah, what's really scary is not unlike "death panels", the "forced loan" scandal that's continually repeated by neo-cons is a complete falsehood. banks and mortgage companies wrote failed deals all on their own. it was a way to get rich quick with out the risk, just like derivatives on the stock market. investment firms found ways to make up front cash while passing the risk on to unsuspecting others. they all new this would bust. every last one of them.
whats also scary is being fined $750 or 2% of your gross income for not having health insurance as stated in the new 'health' bill. and that's from an AP story i read on yahoo, not cnn, not fox, not msnbc. but no, we're not being 'forced' into universal health care.
@osidehooligan ~ i agree, (the AP has right leanings, but that's a different subject) the mandate is pathetic, with out single payer keeping costs down, (i.e. real competition). it'll be a disaster if implemented. how can you force people who can't afford overpriced ineffectual bullshit private insurance to buy their crap? by subsidizing the fucking insurance industry? absolute hypocrisy. that's why you see libs backing off this sellout. not to mention the anti-abortion bullshit.
Well, "without risk" to THEM, anyway. The risks were taken by the poor suckers who signed up for ARMs not realizing they wouldn't be able to afford the skyrocketing interest rates. Plus, they passed off the risky mortgages THEY made to other institutions who didn't realize many of the loans should not have been approved in the first place. It's like me picking a rotten apple and giving it to a starving homeless man, knowing full well the thing was rotten... but hey, he didn't starve!
@blog4change ~ well sure. they are, and by that i mean, tea baggers and conservatives, blaming borrowers for banking loan shark schemes. classic ayn rand, rush limbaugh ideology. blame the poor for being poor. blame the raped for being raped. "it's not our fault" we screwed you every chance we got. just pull up your boot straps up and get back to work.
those loans were meant to deceive, get cash up front, and pass on the toxic default to the next fucking crooked enterprise.
My opinion is if I can pay for Nixon`s War On Drugs, that is putting fiendish pot heads behind bars, and Reagan`s 3.4trillion spending spree in the1980s, Bush`s god told me to do it Iraq Occupation and the list could go on. Then I have very little problem paying for Health Care Reform to see all Americans covered, but what do you expect from a party that pushed Tort Reform to limit what a jury could reward on Medical Malpractice, yeah wonder whom`s interest Republicans serve, Up Them All !
@Dagney77 ~ isn't it obvious conservatives, i.e. all republicans and a handfull of conservadems, are obstructing legislation for the good of america as a whole?
you want to end corruption? start with the right's sell out to corporate interests. the health care bill should be obvious what's going on. republicans are amending a bill they have no intention of voting for.
how do you get everything you want and still vote against it?
It is not for the "good of America". It is for the good of President Obama and the Democrats who want to run our lives. It is a takeover to cover up the fact Medicare is going broke.
If the situation was reversed, and Republicans were working on health care reform (in some alternate bizarro-verse where they wanted to) they would not be compromising at all. Just like tax cuts for the wealthy, they'd ram it through and laugh about it afterwards as a job well done.
We democrats could learn something from the republicans, we should use our majority to do all the work that we feel needs to be done and stop trying to satisfy fucks like Grassley.
This has nothing to do with satisfying Republicans. It never was. The problem is trying to find 60 votes in the Democrat ranks for this takeover. I agree with you. Go nuclear! Force it down the people's throats. No one wants it but make them take it. That is the Liberal way!
How can you say no one wants it when the majority of people polled, over and over, even in Joe Lieberman's own state, say they want a public option.
You say force it down their throats...as if regulating health insurance, stopping them from dropping sick people's coverage, stop them from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, improving medical records, introducing competion to keep costs down...is somehow a bad thing. What do you have against any of the aims I just listed?
@gretchen: good luck with (no)commonsensejoe. He's a GOP troll/insurance company shill. Just challenge him to support his claims with evidence and then watch him get real scarce.
How is it not a takeover? The government is telling health insurance companies that they must cap out-of-pocket expenses, and yet cannot have any annual or lifetime maximums. In addition, they cannot refuse to insurance those with expensive pre-existing conditions or charge them more.
How is this going to lower the cost of HEATHCARE? It is not. It is not intended to. The intention is clearly to eliminate private insurance and more towards a single payer system. It is a takeover.
Mr Joe, you seem not to understand the point of the public option. Its main purpose is not only to cover those who can not afford a public option, but also, to facilitate competition in markets, such as Maine, where 72 percent of the market is covered by one insurance provider (thats a low ball estimate), where there is a severe lack of competition to drive down the cost of private insurance.
I actually do understand. At one point, I favored the public option. The problem is this. You have Medicaid, Medicare, S-Chip, and Lord knows how many other medical insurance programs out there for the public. When you combine the new mandates on insurance companies with unlimited backing of the government behind a public option, you are effectively KILLING private insurance. It is single payer by deception and coercion. It will not lower HEALTHCARE COSTS.
When you remove PROFIT from those Healthcare Costs, you automatically lower the price of the care because there isn't a huge Profit Overhead that needs to be covered. Go back to school, Mr. "Common Sense". Oh wait, school is where the scary Liberals are, nevermind. You wouldn't want to be infected with their terrifying "knowledge" and "facts". Better to holler on and on about some fictional "takeover" because talk radio and Fox News said so. You're so smart!
You keep claiming its a GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER. Yes you havent been able to explain HOW it is. Its just another stupid Republican talking point that youve swallowed whole. The Public Option isnt even in the bill anymore, so please explain how theyre "taking over". You're such a complete idiot.
Answer this: would you accept an unlimited obligation for a limited payment? No, why not? That is exactly what the government is telling health insurance companies! You have to cap out of pocket expenses. You cannot limit coverage at all either by the year or for a lifetime. You cannot deny coverage for costly preexisting conditions. You cannot cancel a policy, even if the person lied to get it. Tell me, how is any company going to make a profit with those conditions?
Oh no! Their precious profit! What will they ever do?!? I'm so worried for them! Give me a break. Perhaps there are more important things in life, like say... people surviving illness and being able to receive treatment without going into eternal bankruptcy. People's lives are MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFIT. I know you Republicans have a Reeeeeeally hard time grasping that, but it's true. You all act like you care about life in the abortion debate then SPIT on life when it leaves the womb. Nice.
Sad but true. A fetus has a "right to life", but a 30 year old single mother shouldn't have access to affordable health care for herself and her already existing offspring. If they can't pay for it, they should just DIE, right? Yeah, pro-life only applies to the unborn and the rich. Kind of how they pick and choose which parts of the bible they want to shove in our faces, while ignoring all the parts that contradict their Randian sense of entitlement and self-importance.
Who cares about their profit?! These companies are making BILLIONS in profits that ought to be spent on HEALTH CARE! Those profits aren't doing any good except to line the pockets of CEOs and executives who are already wealthier than 95% of Americans. Insurance is a racket. Let's eliminate insurance and pay doctors DIRECTLY, with a single-payer, universal health care system that covers EVERYONE and profits NOONE.
Then the Democrats should DO that and be honest about it. The problem is NOT them making billions. Their profit margin is around 4% which is not exacting outrageous.
4% is not outrageous? maybe 4% of $100 isn't outrageous, but we're talking 4% of BILLIONS upon BILLIONS of dollars in revenue. Billions of dollars in profit made by denying coverage to people when they need it most, and that's OKAY with you? Millions spent lobbying AGAINST reform to satisfy a handful of greedy, already wealthy shareholders, and you don't have a problem with that? There's no free market in health insurance, and that's okay with you too?
No, I don't have a problem with a 4% profit. I have a problem with liberals in Washington blaming the PROBLEMS they cause on corporations. Medicare does not pay the full cost of the care provided to their patients. Who do you think picks up this cost? The rest of us through high medical costs and insurance premiums! Why don't you buy a few shares of an insurance company instead of whining about how they are screwing you.
Thank you for proving my point .... AGAIN. That is your opinion, not fact and you present no facts to support your opinion.
Do you even actually understand what constitutes a reasoned, fact-based argument? You know, the kind where one presents an opinion and then gives evidence other than that opinion in support?
What do you want? A signed letter from the Democrats that this is indeed a takeover. Did you even read what I wrote? Obviously NOT!
Tell me, would you accept an unlimited obligation for a limited compensation?
Tell me, how is any of this going to lower the COST of healthcare (i.e. the fees charged by providers, doctors, and hospitals)?
Tell me, what happens when the insurance companies decide that there is no profit in health insurance anymore and stop issuing policies? What do we do then?
I agree completely ETericET. Too many people hoover up the bullshit and lies being spread by the GOP and Faux News without even giving one thought to verifying if that information is accurate. There's another examples in one of (no)CommonSenseJoe's later posts, alleging that Obama has done "nothing". He said "he hasn't even ended the war". I guess he didn't notice that Obama has all along stated he intended to finish the job in Afghanistan that BushCo ignored.
Are we still in Iraq? YES! Are we still in Afghanistan? YES! Do we still have "Don't ask, Don't tell"? YES! De we still of DOMA? Yes! Are we still doing domestic surveillance? YES! Is GITMO still open? YES!
Unemployment is UP! The deficit is UP! Government Spending is UP!
Common Sense Joe shows that coomen sense is anything but common these days. CSJ also says gitmo isn't cloing, if that's true why is the gop screamoing bloody muder about bring the inmate the the US to stand trial. If CSJ had any common sense he would know you can't fix 8 years of neglect and incomatance in 1 year.
Not according to the latest polling! If it were, the Democrats would be all in favor of it.
You claim that the insurance companies have done all these bad things, but I have not seen any evidence that it was a wide spread practice. How do you think insurance companies are going react to all these new mandates on them? Would you accept an unlimited obligation for a limited payment?
"but I have not seen any evidence that it was a wide spread practice."
OK, maybe you really do work for Humana or United Health. I thought all these other people were just being hyperbolic.
No honest person could make such a statement as I have quoted above and expect to be taken seriously. Really? Rescission not widespread? Premiums not rising many many times the rate of inflation? Memos discovered that being a police officer or a victim of rape are pre-existing conditions? Fuck off
No, I have not seen evidence that it was widespread. However let's say for the sake of discussion it is. Then let's make it against the law to do it, but that does not cost us a trillion dollars.
None of that has to do with the rising cost of healthCARE. Health insurance costs go up because the cost of healthcare goes up. One of the significant causes of that is the failure of the government to fully pay for Medicare patients.
WRONG. Insurance costs go up because insurance is a MONOPOLY. They can raise the rates whenever they darn well please, as they've proven time and time again. Our for-profit insurance system is nothing but a get-rich-quick scheme benefiting the CEOs and shareholders, at the expense of policyholders who need actual HEALTH CARE and can't get it thanks to a few greedy millionaires holding the reigns.
Here what I don't get. How many rich liberals are there? You know like the Kennedys, the Kerrys, and such. Why don't they all get together and start a medical insurance company? They could should the rest of us how these companies should run their business!
Sorry, but you're a total moron. And if Liberals are the ones running only on emotion and not the Republicans, then why are the Repubs using FEAR-MONGERING and SCARE TACTICS, like they always do? Because that's how they operate, appealing to people's EMOTIONS. Just like the Iraq War and 9/11. They scared everyone into buying their useless war. Fear WORKS for ignorant Republicans. Dems don't use these tactics because they don't work on educated, intelligent people. You've been brainwashed, fool.
To tell people the truth is NOT FEAR-MONGERING. Inventing a crisis in order to get healthcare reform is. Inventing global climate change to get cap-n-trade is.
OK youve just proven completely that you get all your info and base your "opinions" on whatever right-wing radio and Fox News tell you. Who invented a crisis for healthcare reform? What crisis?? You're talking out of your ass entirely. And you think climate change is "invented"? Are you effing KIDDING me? And this whole giant global conspiracy just so they can get "cap and trade"?? Wow. Turn off the Rush Limbaugh, do yourself a favor and go back to school, cause your "logic" is suffering badly.
You are the one who basing your "opinions" the lies of the media. Tell me, how does less than 10% without medical insurance suddenly become a crisis? How does beating up on the health insurance companies lower the cost of healthcare? If we beat up on the car insurance companies, will it lower the cost of repairing car after an accident?
You want logic. Tell me, why is it now called "climate change" instead of global warming? I know, Do YOU?
With unemployment OVER 10% and REAL unemployment closer to 20%, it's impossible that only "less than 10%", as you claim, are uninsured. Everyone who IS employed isn't insured, so the uninsured rate is being lowballed considerably. There's no way that with unemployment nearing 20% (REAL unemployment, not the unemployment benefit claims rate) that all those unemployed are insured, when those who are employed aren't even insured.
Those people are included in the number of insured. Nationwide, an average of about 20-30% of the insured are covered by those programs you mentioned and Medicare. Just under 60% are covered by private insurance, and around 15% are uninsured.
They either 1) can't afford it - a family policy for me and my kids would cost us upwards of $13k per year, IF we could get one (allergies, pre-existing condition = DENIED coverage from the get-go), 2) don't think they need it, or 3) don't realize they qualify for Medicaid. First things first, we ought to get everyone who qualifies onto Medicaid THEN worry about the rest, which will likely end up being a much smaller number of people
I guess you need a better job then or should have had less kids. I have paid my own health insurance for decades and hardly ever used it. At the same time people go without insurance, but have mobile phones, flat screens, and real nice cars. Their choice is their problem.
The real issue is not that people are uninsured, it's the COST of private insurance. Insuring everyone will spread the risk and, in turn, lower costs for everyone - as long as we make sure the private ins. companies can't gouge prices to meet their paltry 4% profit margin. Do you know what 4% of 100 billion is? It's enough to provide insurance for every person who is currently uninsured. And then some.
It is not your money to spend on anyone. The profit belongs to those who make it. The cost of insurance is the result of higher medical care costs. If a company cannot make a profit, they will stop writing health insurance. Then what will people do?
I know. This is all about covering up that Medicare is quickly going broke. When government takes over all of healthcare, they can hide this fact in the numbers.
@CommonSenseJoe ~ lol, medicare is not a 'for profit' entity. it's tax dollars, duh! the current private insurance company skims 35% off hospitals, doctors, and patients and gives no tangible service or product toward your health.
how can medicare go broke if we spent a trillion dollars in iraq?
you know, at one time common sense thought the universe revolved around the earth, and it also thought the earth was flat... hell, even a jack ass has common sense.
No, they don't. Insurance companies provide a service. You don't have to use their service if you don't want to. Pay all your medical bills out of your own pocket and keep the 35% for yourself!
Insurance companies charge premiums and then accept the obligation to pay your medical bills within specific limitations. They don't skim off the providers. They negotiate certain price structures, but they don't skim.
@CommonSenseJoe ~ you don't understand the profit principle of private health insurance? yes, they SKIM 35% of all money in the health care system. it's profit. they may or may not cover you to suck 35 cents out of every dollar. thousands lose their coverage every week, a million a year go bankrupt due to medical bills and 80% of them have insurance. 45,000 die each year because they can't get treatment or care. 83% of the uninsured work.
Those are not "facts" but statistical frauds. No one dies from a lack of health insurance. Even people with good health insurance die.
I understand the difference between profit and overhead. It is not skimming to pay your employees or to advertise or to protect yourself from the government.
Most insurance companies pay their claims. Some loss their coverage because they stop paying for it. Some because they LIED to get the coverage in the first place.
@CommonSenseJoe ~ "statistical fraud"? FACT. a harvard study found 45,000 americans die a year without treatable care. FACT. at free health clinics that thousands of people attend and drive hundreds of miles for, work. FACT 83% percent of them work with no insurance. FACT 2 and 3 jobs some of them. FACT some are litterally dying and most haven't seen a doctor in years. FACT a million file for bankruptcy every year for MEDICAL BILLS. FACT 4 OF 5 have private insurance.
@tomitstube Those who did the Harvard study have backed away from the conclusion that people for a lack of health insurance. I never said I was against free health clinics. Having insurance does not mean it won't ever run out or have limits.
@CommonSenseJoe cont. ~ harvard isn't backing off their study, what's your source? if anything they've considered the number of people dying without access to treatable care is probably higher than 45,000 a year.
we are talking about health care. the ability of u.s. citizens and their access to seeing a goddamn doctor, not buying fucking tires or a goddamn snow cone at the tasty freeze.
@tomitstube - Look it up. Those who produced the study are saying the Democrats have misrepresented their conclusions. They pulled data from several old studies and combined it with highly subjective judgments.
I have not said that there is not a problem. The question is what is the REAL problem and what caused it. I believe it is the GOVERNMENT that cause the problem so I find it hard to believe that THEY are the solution.
so commonjoe, how bad does that make the private health care industry if they can't even handle half the population.
call it what you want, private care is useless, it costs money and lives. defend this crap i you want, i don't care. i've run circles around on this and all you can muster is fear for the government nonsense. it's obvious our tax dollars are clearly heads about the private market in health care.
@tomitstube Give me your solution! You want total government control over AL healthcare? Fine, then be prepared for high costs, less care, and more people dying.
Think about what people do to get S.S. disability, and that will be the claims service you will get from the government.
@CommonSenseJoe ~ it's "intellectual dishonest", as sherrod brown mentions here. altho, i have a hard time with the intellectual part.
here's something you've probably been sheltered from. 1/2 of all americans are currently getting their health care thru one from of government program or another.
50% of all americans get their health care thru the government. "socialized medicine"? seems to working just fine. lol, you didn't even notice we were already socialist".
@tomitstube The programs are NOT working fine. They are going broke, cutting reimbursements, and losing providers. They are not even socialist programs because those involved are not even paying for them AT ALL!
@CommonSenseJoe ~ how do you get health coverage by lying? that's one of the most ignorant things i've ever heard. hospitals and doctors are now requiring money up front. i know someone with stomach cancer who was told he needed to come up with $15,000 to get a 2nd operation. HE HAD PRIVATE COVERAGE!!!!! they wouldn't provide the treatment without the cash.
that's your crappy ass private health care system, pull you head out of you ass, does it have to happen to you to get it?
@tomitstube Obviously, you hate private insurance. I get that. If you lie on your application and conceal a pre-existing condition, you can be canceled. I did not say that there are not problems. My point was only that it is not caused by the health insurance companies.
@CommonSenseJoe ~ of course i hate the private health system. it's a crappy product that has no value, it's a dysfunctional bogged down, crooked, denying everything system, that as common policy chooses profit over treatment for the sick, it charges too much, it takes too much, and it leaves half this countries citizens under-insured and choosing between seeing a doctor or just hoping a condition just gets better. they skim billions off already out of control costs. it's a scam, and a racket.
you are a fucking retard, you think the problem is in the insurance sector, how about regulations that make Hospitals and doctors not refuse treatment, and not require insurance in the fucking first place? problem solved for free
Yes, the problem is with INSURANCE. Insurance is not HEALTH CARE, it's a fucking racket. It doesn't even guarantee ACCESS to health care. Hospitals not refusing treatment has NOTHING to do with insurance costs. Hospitals and insurance cos are NOT one and the same. Hospitals loss from indigent patients has NO effect on insurance premiums, it only affects the hospital's bottom line.
He speaks the truth here, Democrats may be often incompetent or idiotic, but by and large it IS THE REPUBLICANS who are the biggest bunch of intellectually dishonest pieces of crap in the congress. They obstruct everything, scream bloody murder over everything, and will lie, distort, and exaggerate anything in order to fire up their narrow-minded, uneducated and wholly ignorant base. It works time and time again, so they have no reason to try any other strategies. Only education will stop them.
You are delusional. Democrats have lied to their own time and time again. Obama has not done a single thing he promised. He never intended to do it. He is not ending the war. He is not repealing the DOMA. He has not even closed Gitmo yet.
What the hell does Obama have to do with a discussion over which PARTY is more intellectually dishonest. As I said, Dems may be often incompetent or idiotic and yes of course they have lied, but if you pay any attention AT ALL you will notice that the Repubs are more more closed-minded, intellectually dishonest, and obstructionist. Their base is less educated and more emotional, what do you expect to be the natural outcome of that?
Republicans are "more closed-minded, intellectually dishonest, and obstructionist" and "Their base is less educated and more emotional". Who are you trying to kid? Democrats, especially liberals, run on only emotion. President OBama was elected on emotion. Any thinking person knew he was promising stuff he would NEVER deliver on.
This is the essential difference between the parties. Republicans have made mistakes, but they are telling the people the truth. Democrats have to lie.
You people keep repeating the phrase "death panels" as if anyone said that they were actually in the bill. Palin was talking about the future when the government controls ALL of healthcare.
What do you call it when the government takes over private business and rewrites the laws given the union a share of the company while stealing it for others who PAID for it?
Umm - NO SHE WASNT. I'm sure Fox News failed to inform you, but she was referring to a SPECIFIC PASSAGE IN THE BILL which she twisted out of utter idiocy into saying that it would set up Death Panels which would decide who would live and who would die. Get your facts straight. There was a ton of discussion about that particular passage which sparked the whole Death Panel talk, it was in no way about some fictional "future". I can't believe you didnt know that -- oh wait, yes I can.
Again, she was talking about the future IF we go down the road to government paid for healthcare. I don't want the person who is treating me paid by the government who is trying contain costs.
Why am I a shill because I don't want the government running my healthcare. Are you an OBAMA SHILL? Why don't you think for yourself just this once, and ask a few questions.
No Joe, you're a shill because you continue to post the same baseless, unsubstantiated rhetoric disseminated by the GOP, Faux News, and their handlers in the insurance industry. Then, you fail to back any of those assertions with supporting evidence and scurry off to somewhere else and post the same bullshit ad nauseum. That is why I label you a shill.
I'm not an Obama shill and don't like some of the things he does. However, I can back up everything I state with factual evidence.
They are all full of shit and all should be behind bars! These assclowns lie and the media swears to it. Too many idiots believe the bullshit coming out of the idiot box as truth and it couldn't be further from it! Wake up their all are liars.
So this twit is tired of "intellectually dishonest Republicans"? Well, Republicans are tired of democrats ignoring facts, hiding the truth and lying through their teeth.
i wonder who lied about mobile weapopns production chambers that lead to a disasterous war. Oh yeah, as i recall it was the right. take time to reflect next time you want to bring up lies.
I love when Democrats talk about "intellectual honesty". They have been lying about healthcare "reform" from the beginning. They know it and now the American people are learning it.
The whole thing has been a lie from the beginning. First, the President said it would not affect those who already have insurance. Now, with all the new requirements, MY premiums are going up. Second, no one actually believes you can cover more people and spend LESS. That is the height of intellectual dishonesty. Third, you cannot "cut" over 500 billion from Medicare and not reduce the benefits to seniors. This is a mathematical fact. This is and has always been a takeover of healthcare.
Prove to me that there is 500 billion in waste, fraud and abuse first, and then prove you can find and deal with it. Until then, you cannot say you are saving anything, only cutting.
If the Congress would have reformed Medicare and Medicaid, that would have helped to solve the problem. Medical insurance goes up because MEDICAL COSTS go up. There is an average of 4% profit in health insurance. They are not the problem. Underpaying providers for Medicare patients is the problem.
What a waste!
mozart1942 1 year ago
i'm tired of unintellectually retarded democrats
TheUnitedStatists 1 year ago
Well I'm tiered of bills being written behind closed doors and being passed that help the wrong people, I'm tiered of the bought of media telling us what to buy, what to fear, what to believe, and how we should live our lives. I'm tiered of the constant lies and minipulation by the banker controlled government towards the American people. I'm tiered of wars, the infringement of our freedoms and liberty's. I'm just tiered of the whole system it needs to be wiped clean.
animeownage86 1 year ago
LO
The section of Article I, Section 8 you refer to is part of a preamble to some twenty enumerated powers intended to restrict the Fed from encroaching on the States, not a mandate to do anything, as you suggest.
Hmmm, lets see Lincoln and more perfect union you got that from Obama more perfect union speech in 2008, right? If so it seems what youre inclined to think about the framers intent in questionable.
mamothzoe1 1 year ago
Im inclined to think people like Madison would be disappointed to see that in attempting to fashion a sufficiently strong federal government they had failed to protect us from that same power. A failure they new could happen especially if Americas people were inclined to abandon knowledge of their history and the protection that knowledge might provide.
mamothzoe1 1 year ago
With regard to if we on the road to a financial crisis due to debt and deficit I defer to Obama. Get a transcript from the latest health care reform debate, theres no if in his view.
mamothzoe1 1 year ago
I consider myself politically alert enough to get by. Your account regarding which party did what relative to spending is OK by me. With regard to which party I might support as I said earlier and I repeat Ive been around long enough to see America decline. That includes both parties as well. In my view both parties are filled with people so rabidly focused on winning they dont realize they are damaging our future.
mamothzoe1 1 year ago
As far as acting out of self interest there are far too many people in my opinion doing exactly that already, SEIU, AFL-CIO, Congressmen and Senators and business interests all come to mind. What ever happened to ask not what your country can do for you?
mamothzoe1 1 year ago
Finally I agree something needs to be done about health care cost growth, just not by the federal government. It makes no sense on one side to argue the federal government should take Americas health care system over and on the other side acknowledge its influenced by special interests.
mamothzoe1 1 year ago
To be fair to you I'm one of those crazies who still reads about our constitution. I'd guess it's been 30 years since the first time I read Locke, Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers.
I have no love for or faith in either party. I've lived long enough to witness a gradual decline in our county that you apparently do not see.
According to David Walker (former US comptroller) our country is at a financial cross road.
What else can I say my friend good luck to you
mamothzoe1 1 year ago
I congratulate you on your familiarity with the Constitution. This means you are undoubtedly aware of the Article I, Section 8 clause mandating Congress provide for the "general Welfare of the United States." Lincoln described the Constitution as a blueprint for future Americans to follow, always working toward a more perfect union. I'm inclined to think that many of the Framers would have agreed with him. (continued)
LarcheOsborne 1 year ago
This would suggest that if your financial concerns are valid, you would, if from enlightened self-interest alone, support the party that has proven to be the most fiscally responsible.
I think it should also be noted that the Democratic healthcare bills all reduce the deficit while that presented by Republicans significantly increases the deficit.
LarcheOsborne 1 year ago
Now, technology and medical advances enable us to fulfill the Framers' mandate to provide for the general Welfare as never before.
Our nation may well be at a financial crossroads. If so, such a plight makes it imperative that we pass healthcare. The US spends a stunning high amount of its GNP on healthcare when compared to the nations of Western Euope, all of which have single-payer systems and obtain better results than we do. (continued)
LarcheOsborne 1 year ago
If you have been politically alert for the past three decades, you will have noticed that the executive up until 2009 has been controlled by two Democrats (Carter and Clinton) and three Republicans (Reagan, GHW Bush, and GW Bush). When it came to the deficit, the two Democratic presidents did the most to restrain it. Clinton actually left office with the largest surplus in US history. The deficit grew rapidly under GOP presidents. (continued)
LarcheOsborne 1 year ago
@LarcheOsborne
I believe your comments are sincere. Having no direct exposure to other systems I wouldn't attempt to challenge your view of them.
mamothzoe1 1 year ago
The point of my previous post was our form of government is volatile by design. Each election cycle can bring dramatic changes in policy as seen by the Clinton then Bush and now Obama administrations. Our system also seems overly susceptible to special interests be they unions, business interests and/or vocal minorities.
mamothzoe1 1 year ago
Our government is less volatile than you may imagine. No democratic republic is so long-lived as ours. Only one true constitutional crisis ever truly threatened to ruin our nations, namely the attempted revolt of slave-holding states, and that crisis lead to much needed reform (13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments.) While our Constitution defines us as a liberal democracy, it is notoriously difficult to change. Don't confuse political swings with a formal change in our form of government. (continued)
LarcheOsborne 1 year ago
One of the special interests to which our government is especially susceptible is corporate heathcare insurance. To contrast its goals with those of unions, whose monetary resources are exceedingly less, unions have sought the elimination of child labor, ending physical abuse of female laborers, establishment of the 8-hour work day, improved safety conditions, fair wages, and so on, corporate goals are decidedly self-interested and commonly detrimental to the public interest.
LarcheOsborne 1 year ago
According to the CBO there are two drivers for growing health care cost.
First, 70 million aging baby boomers are beginning to retire. Second, expensive high technology medicine (think arthroscopic surgery vs. a plain old scalpel). Go to the CBO web site reports to congress for your self.
mamothzoe1 1 year ago
The question isnt will the health care program pay for itself (I personally doubt it). In the 1930s Roosevelt couldnt know what would happen with his grand experiment in creating a nationwide entitlement program.
The problem with Sherrod Brown and his progressive pals is they havent learned they cant control everything as much as they would like. Why expand the failed policies of the past as the progressives are so fond of saying.
mamothzoe1 1 year ago
Governments in a host of nations including Canada, the UK, and virtually all Western Europe have proven that they can deliver better health care at a lower cost. National healthcare programs are not "failed policies." They survive and thrive across the world, and these nations, having experienced American-style in the past, have no desire to give up their single payer systems and return to the tenderness of health insurance corporations.
LarcheOsborne 1 year ago
It is with this in mind that I am mistrustful of the expansion of federal control of the health care system. There is no doubt we have to address health care costs. Never the less there is nothing about the nature of our federal system that encourages me to put them in charge. While some want the public option I want another option.
mamothzoe1 1 year ago
The federal government is the best vehicle for securing healthcare reform. As it now stands, only states have powers sufficient to regulate the standards by which insurance companies must abide within their jurisdictions, and Republicans are eager to strip the states of even these regulatory limits. The federal government has demonstrated remarkable successes in large tasks -the military, interstate highways, elimination of infectious diseases, air and naval navigation, and so on. (continued)
LarcheOsborne 1 year ago
Be assured that the bill endorsed by those who seek a public option will not rob you of the option of selecting private insurance if that is indeed your desire. You can go to congress(dot)org and read the various bills for yourself.
LarcheOsborne 1 year ago
Sherrod Brown is explaining the facts of the matter regarding Senator Judd Gregg. Insurance companies are doing just fine. We don't have to worry about them. The sick state of our health care system is hurting everyone (except health insurance and pharmaceutical CEOs). It is hurting our nation as a whole, because we are a sicker nation. That costs more. It hurts businesses(lack of productivity and high premiums), it is hurting our chances of competing with other nations for market share.
growknow 2 years ago
commonjoe ~ we are the richest country in the world and we pay twice as much for care that 1/5 don't have access to and 1/2 can't fucking afford. the health care it self is excellent , probably the best. so why does it suck so bad? because all the idiots who are afraid of the government getting between them and their doctor allow it to happen with private insurance at 6 TIMES THE COST! who do you think is paying for the millions the insurance industry is dumping right now? hint. WE ARE.
tomitstube 2 years ago
@tomitstube - First, everyone has access to care. Hospitals have to treat people. Second, affordability is an issue, but what has cause health care costs to increase so much?
You are blaming the increases in the cost of CARE on the insurance companies. The cost is determined by providers, not insurance companies. Nearly half of the people are on Medicare, Medicaid, or some other government heath insurance. The single biggest insurer is GOVERNMENT. Who do you think is paying for that?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@CommonSenseJoe ~ "So whats your answer? Socialized medicine where you the government will determine your care for you".
where did you get "determine" from? you're just making this stuff up aren't you? it's actually private care that's making decisions about your care. you aren't paying attention are you?
is there ANY chance conservatives will ever debate an honest dialogue about health care? this whole anti-government stuff is lame and getting old.
tomitstube 2 years ago
@tomitstube Let's have an honest dialogue about healthcare. The reason healthcare costs have skyrocketed is Medicare and Medicaid. These are government run healthcare programs that DO NOT PAY THE FULL COST OF CARE PROVIDED. This cost is shifted to private insurance companies through increase costs. Tell me, what will happen when everyone is on a government program and there is no one to shift the cost too?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
this clown brown cant even comb his hair
namtesyalp 2 years ago
Judgment Day on May 21, 2011 as recently revealed in Bible. Details on linked website. NO church connection.
Medicare irrelevant soon.
dimstar4now 2 years ago
the only way this bill could reduce the deficit is if it taxes they shit out of us, and then that money is used to reduce debt instead of go to health care. So even if this fuckbag is right, it's still irresponsible because they are taxing us and that money is not going to services.
hugegiantfrogs 2 years ago
Um, no. Health care spending RIGHT NOW is adding to the deficit. If we CUT spending, we reduce the deficit. Is it also irresponsible that the insurance companies are charging us tens of thousands in premiums and NOT spending that money on "services", like the health care their policyholders need? Instead, they are spending BILLIONS on advertising, lobbying, and executive pay - while people WITH insurance can't get the care they need?
blog4change 2 years ago
No one has proved that the insurance companies are not paying their claims. They are legally bound by their contracts. If you want to change the law to make those contracts clearer then I am all for that. The rising cost of healthcare is caused by the government, not the insurance companies.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
LOL.. You are one sad, brainwashed zombie. Keep praying to your corporate gods, I'm sure they'll answer....You seem to be confused about the nature of insurance companies. They are MONOPOLIES. How does that sit with your "free market" ideals? Again, INSURANCE is not "health care". If not for insurance companies, ACTUAL health care costs would be much lower. Paying a middleman is always more expensive than paying the actual source, because the middleman takes a cut off the top.
blog4change 2 years ago
I am not confused. If you think they are monopolies then you should break them up by improving competition. The rules and regulations make it almost impossible for new companies to challenge the bigger ones.
So the cost of fixing your car after an accident is determine by the car insurance companies? Do you even know how medical insurance got started in the first place?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
I don't THINK they're monopolies, they ARE monopolies. Antitrust exemptions... hello? Hopefully the final bill will repeal those exemptions, but that isn't enough to bring competition to the industry - when the existing leaders already have the market cornered. Auto insurance isn't comparable, it functions completely different from health insurance. Auto ins. cos don't take a cut off the repair bill, health insurance DOES.
blog4change 2 years ago
Sure it is. No insurance company gets a cut from the providers. They negotiate lower prices if they can, but that is not a "cut". Blaming insurance companies for the high cost of care is stupid. It is the government who have driven up the price of healthcare.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
You're so wrong, it isn't even funny. look, the insurance companies make a PROFIT off customer premiums (the premium is how much you pay for health insurance, or the monthly payment), so yes, they are taking a "cut" of your money. The profit they make is money that ISN'T being spent on actual health care. Blaming insurance companies for the high cost of INSURANCE (not health care, as insurance doesn't provide care) isn't stupid, it's FACT. The ins. companies charge whatever they want to.
blog4change 2 years ago
The profit margin on health insurance is about 4%. So at best, their "cut" as you put it is 4%. The problem is the high cost of healthcare. The question is why is healthcare cost spiraling upward. The answer is that the government fails to pay the full cost of treating Medicare and Medicaid patients. Providers must make up the loss by shifting it to other patients and their insurance companies.
Insurance companies cannot charge whatever they want because if there is competition.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
4% of how much? 4% of $100 may not be much, but what's 4% of 600 billion dollars? Kind of puts it in perspective, doesn't it? Healthcare costs are "spiraling upwards" because of the UNINSURED, who can't pay their medical bills. Those costs get passed on to everyone else (they don't just magically disappear when nobody pays for them, you know). That's why UNIVERSAL coverage is important. If everyone is covered, everyone's bills get paid and costs come down.
blog4change 2 years ago
No, you are wrong. The uninsured are not the majority of the problem. Medicare reimbursement is less than 80%. Medicaid is less than 60%. More than HALF the people are on government insurance plans. If it was just the uninsured, then a mandate would fix the problem.
4% is a still a small profit margin regardless whether it is $100 or a billion.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
I didn't say they get a cut from the PROVIDER, they get a cut from YOU, from the premiums you pay them. The less actual health care they allow you to receive, the more money they make.
blog4change 2 years ago
You can get all the healthcare you want. The insurance company is only one means of paying for it. If you don't like them, don't buy insurance and run the risk yourself.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
I think you mean, "You can get all the healthcare you can AFFORD", which for many people is NONE at all. Affordable insurance means affordable HEALTHCARE for those who are currently unable to scrape together several hundred dollars for ONE doctor visit. Having insurance reduces the cost when health care services are needed so you don't end up paying $20,000 to have a baby. Without insurance, who can afford that?
blog4change 2 years ago
You are beginning to understand the problem. The reason insurance costs so much is NOT because the insurance companies are ripping you off. A 4% profit is not an outrageous margin. The real problem is the actual cost of healthcare itself. If you can lower the cost of the care, you will lower the cost of the insurance you have to pay for that care. The heart of the problem is WHY is healthcare costs going up so fast? The answer is simple. The government fails to pay providers enough.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
No, the problem is the uninsured. That's what drives up costs, not the government. 4% is subjective. 4% of WHAT? 4% of a dollar? Or 4% of hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars? Yes, insurance is a ripoff. They charge you tens of thousands of dollars a year and then DENY you coverage when you actually need it. That's how they make their money, by DENYING health care to sick people. And you support that? You're despicable.
blog4change 2 years ago
IF insurance companies are wrongly denying coverage then that should be addressed. However health insurance is a contractual agreement between the insured and insurer. If you don't like your insurance company, sign up with another. There are lots of them out there.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Of course they do. It is not a cut. It is the price I pay to have insurance. To transfer the risk from me to them. They are there to make money and provide a service. If you don't like the service, don't buy it. Better yet, all these rich liberals could start their own health insurance company and compete with them. How billions do the Kerrys, the Kennedys and such have among them? Start a company and provide the service, and prove that these others are a rip off.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
btw oside, what the right has sabotaged in health care reform is no longer "universal care". and now these hypocrite repubs are blaming the left for their own gutting of what could have been beneficial to everyone. you, me, the federal deficit, hospitals, doctors, patients... an absolute travesty what conservatives have done. i only hope the public sees thru this blatant heresy and votes these corporate sellouts out of office.
tomitstube 2 years ago 2
It was never intended to be universal care. It was intended to be what it is, a government takeover to cover up the fact that Medicare is going broke. Nothing in the bill lower healtcare costs. In fact, it will raise them because of the Medicare cuts.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@tomitstube
did you not read my initial post? i am not for greedy insurance companies or the politcians they hold in their pockets. nor do i want state run health care. it is a flawed system. tell me, how is this bill in its 'ungutted' form benficial? how does it lower the deficit, amongst other 'obvious' benefits.' as an independent i always read posts on how liberals have the market on 'facts' and 'knowledge' cornered so tell me how is this 2000 page bill beneficial?
osidehooligan 2 years ago
@tomitstube
and when you tell me how this 2000 page bill is beneficial i want you to tell me which section, page, paragraph, sub-section, etc describes the benefits laid out in that certain part of the bill. after all, in order to have 'facts' on your side you must first have an absolute, clear and thorough understanding of what you are presenting. as a enlightened liberal i'm sure you would agree and would be more than happy to comply with such a simple request.
osidehooligan 2 years ago
@osidehooligan ~ i don't understand your rant. are you wanting me to explain the bill now, or how it would work in a single payer system. SEE MEDICARE.
"beneficial"? simple math. private insurance takes 35% without providing a single product or service, chooses who lives or dies, won't insure 1/5 the population, 1/2 is under-insured.
the failure is what we have now. a colossal FAILURE! status quo, the current give away bill is suicidal. i told you i don't want this senate crap!
tomitstube 2 years ago
wow. way to say "I don't know"
and again, i do know the insurance companies are nothing but thieves. but this so called 'health' bill which you so wholeheartedly support in its whole form you do not even know about it. that's the point i'm making. you support something that you know nothing about.
osidehooligan 2 years ago
lol, "death panels" are making a strange comeback in the last few days. even after politico-fact checkers gave "death panels" the biggest lie of 2009.
a little like republicans and conservatives in a nut shell, they can be proven wrong in 14 different ways, but they remain undeterred. it's all part of dubya's real "doctrine". repeat lies until they're accepted as fact by your ignorant base. an adopted doctrine by palin, beck, bachman, an dimbaugh.
tomitstube 2 years ago 2
People lets stopp feeding the troll common sense joe. There is no use to debate with him he has no facts and no matter how many times you prove something to him he will not change his mind.
ETericET 2 years ago
What's scary about this whole health system overhaul is that in the same way the govt forced mortgage companies and banks to give loans so everyone has a home so then the govt may do the same to make sure everyone is covered. All I can see is another near total economic meltdown with health care just as in the housing market. We don't need greedy insurance companies nor do we need universal health care. I'd say not for profit co-ops would best serve us all.
osidehooligan 2 years ago
@osidehooligan ~ nah, what's really scary is not unlike "death panels", the "forced loan" scandal that's continually repeated by neo-cons is a complete falsehood. banks and mortgage companies wrote failed deals all on their own. it was a way to get rich quick with out the risk, just like derivatives on the stock market. investment firms found ways to make up front cash while passing the risk on to unsuspecting others. they all new this would bust. every last one of them.
tomitstube 2 years ago
@tomitstube
whats also scary is being fined $750 or 2% of your gross income for not having health insurance as stated in the new 'health' bill. and that's from an AP story i read on yahoo, not cnn, not fox, not msnbc. but no, we're not being 'forced' into universal health care.
osidehooligan 2 years ago
@osidehooligan ~ i agree, (the AP has right leanings, but that's a different subject) the mandate is pathetic, with out single payer keeping costs down, (i.e. real competition). it'll be a disaster if implemented. how can you force people who can't afford overpriced ineffectual bullshit private insurance to buy their crap? by subsidizing the fucking insurance industry? absolute hypocrisy. that's why you see libs backing off this sellout. not to mention the anti-abortion bullshit.
tomitstube 2 years ago
Well, "without risk" to THEM, anyway. The risks were taken by the poor suckers who signed up for ARMs not realizing they wouldn't be able to afford the skyrocketing interest rates. Plus, they passed off the risky mortgages THEY made to other institutions who didn't realize many of the loans should not have been approved in the first place. It's like me picking a rotten apple and giving it to a starving homeless man, knowing full well the thing was rotten... but hey, he didn't starve!
blog4change 2 years ago
If you are stupid enough to sign a mortgage with an ARM, then you should own a home.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@blog4change ~ well sure. they are, and by that i mean, tea baggers and conservatives, blaming borrowers for banking loan shark schemes. classic ayn rand, rush limbaugh ideology. blame the poor for being poor. blame the raped for being raped. "it's not our fault" we screwed you every chance we got. just pull up your boot straps up and get back to work.
those loans were meant to deceive, get cash up front, and pass on the toxic default to the next fucking crooked enterprise.
tomitstube 2 years ago
really
really
boring
lousy
channel
Danold31wa 2 years ago
really
really
boring
lousy
comment
Circumvenscion 2 years ago
My opinion is if I can pay for Nixon`s War On Drugs, that is putting fiendish pot heads behind bars, and Reagan`s 3.4trillion spending spree in the1980s, Bush`s god told me to do it Iraq Occupation and the list could go on. Then I have very little problem paying for Health Care Reform to see all Americans covered, but what do you expect from a party that pushed Tort Reform to limit what a jury could reward on Medical Malpractice, yeah wonder whom`s interest Republicans serve, Up Them All !
selenadelos 2 years ago
Left and Right must come together to end this dictatorship of corruption and bribery in Washington.
What's it gonna take? Suggestions?
Dagney77 2 years ago
@Dagney77 ~ isn't it obvious conservatives, i.e. all republicans and a handfull of conservadems, are obstructing legislation for the good of america as a whole?
you want to end corruption? start with the right's sell out to corporate interests. the health care bill should be obvious what's going on. republicans are amending a bill they have no intention of voting for.
how do you get everything you want and still vote against it?
are you serious? move the country left.
tomitstube 2 years ago
It is not for the "good of America". It is for the good of President Obama and the Democrats who want to run our lives. It is a takeover to cover up the fact Medicare is going broke.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
the right are the corrupt ones pushing it why would they want to end it ?
xadam2dudex 2 years ago
haha.."this bill pays for itself..." i'd LOVE to see how its going to pay for itself lol
tr1v1ums 2 years ago
Our country is fucking retarded.
Jesus.
jhille85 2 years ago 3
If the situation was reversed, and Republicans were working on health care reform (in some alternate bizarro-verse where they wanted to) they would not be compromising at all. Just like tax cuts for the wealthy, they'd ram it through and laugh about it afterwards as a job well done.
We democrats could learn something from the republicans, we should use our majority to do all the work that we feel needs to be done and stop trying to satisfy fucks like Grassley.
Nuclear option. Pass it.
GretchenDawntreader 2 years ago 2
This has nothing to do with satisfying Republicans. It never was. The problem is trying to find 60 votes in the Democrat ranks for this takeover. I agree with you. Go nuclear! Force it down the people's throats. No one wants it but make them take it. That is the Liberal way!
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
How can you say no one wants it when the majority of people polled, over and over, even in Joe Lieberman's own state, say they want a public option.
You say force it down their throats...as if regulating health insurance, stopping them from dropping sick people's coverage, stop them from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, improving medical records, introducing competion to keep costs down...is somehow a bad thing. What do you have against any of the aims I just listed?
GretchenDawntreader 2 years ago
@gretchen: good luck with (no)commonsensejoe. He's a GOP troll/insurance company shill. Just challenge him to support his claims with evidence and then watch him get real scarce.
kaysandesses 2 years ago
You have not asked me to support anything. I claim only that this is and has always been a government takeover of healthcare.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Joe, I've challenged you numerous times to back your assertions with verifiable evidence and all you ever return are statements of opinion.
"is and has always been a government takeover of healthcare. "
Since you brought it up, PROVE your assertion or prove me right.
kaysandesses 2 years ago 3
How is it not a takeover? The government is telling health insurance companies that they must cap out-of-pocket expenses, and yet cannot have any annual or lifetime maximums. In addition, they cannot refuse to insurance those with expensive pre-existing conditions or charge them more.
How is this going to lower the cost of HEATHCARE? It is not. It is not intended to. The intention is clearly to eliminate private insurance and more towards a single payer system. It is a takeover.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@CommonSenseJoe
Mr Joe, you seem not to understand the point of the public option. Its main purpose is not only to cover those who can not afford a public option, but also, to facilitate competition in markets, such as Maine, where 72 percent of the market is covered by one insurance provider (thats a low ball estimate), where there is a severe lack of competition to drive down the cost of private insurance.
ThatAtheistBastard 2 years ago 3
I actually do understand. At one point, I favored the public option. The problem is this. You have Medicaid, Medicare, S-Chip, and Lord knows how many other medical insurance programs out there for the public. When you combine the new mandates on insurance companies with unlimited backing of the government behind a public option, you are effectively KILLING private insurance. It is single payer by deception and coercion. It will not lower HEALTHCARE COSTS.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
When you remove PROFIT from those Healthcare Costs, you automatically lower the price of the care because there isn't a huge Profit Overhead that needs to be covered. Go back to school, Mr. "Common Sense". Oh wait, school is where the scary Liberals are, nevermind. You wouldn't want to be infected with their terrifying "knowledge" and "facts". Better to holler on and on about some fictional "takeover" because talk radio and Fox News said so. You're so smart!
Circumvenscion 2 years ago
What is the profit margin in health insurance? 4%
My problem is with the LIES. Lies spoken by the President who knows he is lying. This is nothing more than a government takeover of healthcare.
Tell, genius, would you accept an unlimited obligation for a limited compensation?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
You keep claiming its a GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER. Yes you havent been able to explain HOW it is. Its just another stupid Republican talking point that youve swallowed whole. The Public Option isnt even in the bill anymore, so please explain how theyre "taking over". You're such a complete idiot.
Circumvenscion 2 years ago
Answer this: would you accept an unlimited obligation for a limited payment? No, why not? That is exactly what the government is telling health insurance companies! You have to cap out of pocket expenses. You cannot limit coverage at all either by the year or for a lifetime. You cannot deny coverage for costly preexisting conditions. You cannot cancel a policy, even if the person lied to get it. Tell me, how is any company going to make a profit with those conditions?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Oh no! Their precious profit! What will they ever do?!? I'm so worried for them! Give me a break. Perhaps there are more important things in life, like say... people surviving illness and being able to receive treatment without going into eternal bankruptcy. People's lives are MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFIT. I know you Republicans have a Reeeeeeally hard time grasping that, but it's true. You all act like you care about life in the abortion debate then SPIT on life when it leaves the womb. Nice.
Circumvenscion 2 years ago 2
Sad but true. A fetus has a "right to life", but a 30 year old single mother shouldn't have access to affordable health care for herself and her already existing offspring. If they can't pay for it, they should just DIE, right? Yeah, pro-life only applies to the unborn and the rich. Kind of how they pick and choose which parts of the bible they want to shove in our faces, while ignoring all the parts that contradict their Randian sense of entitlement and self-importance.
blog4change 2 years ago
Who cares about their profit?! These companies are making BILLIONS in profits that ought to be spent on HEALTH CARE! Those profits aren't doing any good except to line the pockets of CEOs and executives who are already wealthier than 95% of Americans. Insurance is a racket. Let's eliminate insurance and pay doctors DIRECTLY, with a single-payer, universal health care system that covers EVERYONE and profits NOONE.
blog4change 2 years ago
Then the Democrats should DO that and be honest about it. The problem is NOT them making billions. Their profit margin is around 4% which is not exacting outrageous.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
4% is not outrageous? maybe 4% of $100 isn't outrageous, but we're talking 4% of BILLIONS upon BILLIONS of dollars in revenue. Billions of dollars in profit made by denying coverage to people when they need it most, and that's OKAY with you? Millions spent lobbying AGAINST reform to satisfy a handful of greedy, already wealthy shareholders, and you don't have a problem with that? There's no free market in health insurance, and that's okay with you too?
blog4change 2 years ago
No, I don't have a problem with a 4% profit. I have a problem with liberals in Washington blaming the PROBLEMS they cause on corporations. Medicare does not pay the full cost of the care provided to their patients. Who do you think picks up this cost? The rest of us through high medical costs and insurance premiums! Why don't you buy a few shares of an insurance company instead of whining about how they are screwing you.
I have a choice and buy my own insurance.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
"How is it not a takeover?"
Thank you for proving my point .... AGAIN. That is your opinion, not fact and you present no facts to support your opinion.
Do you even actually understand what constitutes a reasoned, fact-based argument? You know, the kind where one presents an opinion and then gives evidence other than that opinion in support?
kaysandesses 2 years ago
What do you want? A signed letter from the Democrats that this is indeed a takeover. Did you even read what I wrote? Obviously NOT!
Tell me, would you accept an unlimited obligation for a limited compensation?
Tell me, how is any of this going to lower the COST of healthcare (i.e. the fees charged by providers, doctors, and hospitals)?
Tell me, what happens when the insurance companies decide that there is no profit in health insurance anymore and stop issuing policies? What do we do then?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
No he doesn't. All he was taught was to recite talking points and dogma.
ETericET 2 years ago
I agree completely ETericET. Too many people hoover up the bullshit and lies being spread by the GOP and Faux News without even giving one thought to verifying if that information is accurate. There's another examples in one of (no)CommonSenseJoe's later posts, alleging that Obama has done "nothing". He said "he hasn't even ended the war". I guess he didn't notice that Obama has all along stated he intended to finish the job in Afghanistan that BushCo ignored.
kaysandesses 2 years ago
Are we still in Iraq? YES! Are we still in Afghanistan? YES! Do we still have "Don't ask, Don't tell"? YES! De we still of DOMA? Yes! Are we still doing domestic surveillance? YES! Is GITMO still open? YES!
Unemployment is UP! The deficit is UP! Government Spending is UP!
Have you had enough truth?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Common Sense Joe shows that coomen sense is anything but common these days. CSJ also says gitmo isn't cloing, if that's true why is the gop screamoing bloody muder about bring the inmate the the US to stand trial. If CSJ had any common sense he would know you can't fix 8 years of neglect and incomatance in 1 year.
ETericET 2 years ago
Is Gitmo closed, or closing? How long has it taken? How long are you going to blame everything on President Bush?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Not according to the latest polling! If it were, the Democrats would be all in favor of it.
You claim that the insurance companies have done all these bad things, but I have not seen any evidence that it was a wide spread practice. How do you think insurance companies are going react to all these new mandates on them? Would you accept an unlimited obligation for a limited payment?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
"but I have not seen any evidence that it was a wide spread practice."
OK, maybe you really do work for Humana or United Health. I thought all these other people were just being hyperbolic.
No honest person could make such a statement as I have quoted above and expect to be taken seriously. Really? Rescission not widespread? Premiums not rising many many times the rate of inflation? Memos discovered that being a police officer or a victim of rape are pre-existing conditions? Fuck off
GretchenDawntreader 2 years ago 4
Now don't get hysterical on me.
No, I have not seen evidence that it was widespread. However let's say for the sake of discussion it is. Then let's make it against the law to do it, but that does not cost us a trillion dollars.
None of that has to do with the rising cost of healthCARE. Health insurance costs go up because the cost of healthcare goes up. One of the significant causes of that is the failure of the government to fully pay for Medicare patients.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
WRONG. Insurance costs go up because insurance is a MONOPOLY. They can raise the rates whenever they darn well please, as they've proven time and time again. Our for-profit insurance system is nothing but a get-rich-quick scheme benefiting the CEOs and shareholders, at the expense of policyholders who need actual HEALTH CARE and can't get it thanks to a few greedy millionaires holding the reigns.
blog4change 2 years ago
Here what I don't get. How many rich liberals are there? You know like the Kennedys, the Kerrys, and such. Why don't they all get together and start a medical insurance company? They could should the rest of us how these companies should run their business!
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Sorry, but you're a total moron. And if Liberals are the ones running only on emotion and not the Republicans, then why are the Repubs using FEAR-MONGERING and SCARE TACTICS, like they always do? Because that's how they operate, appealing to people's EMOTIONS. Just like the Iraq War and 9/11. They scared everyone into buying their useless war. Fear WORKS for ignorant Republicans. Dems don't use these tactics because they don't work on educated, intelligent people. You've been brainwashed, fool.
Circumvenscion 2 years ago 2
To tell people the truth is NOT FEAR-MONGERING. Inventing a crisis in order to get healthcare reform is. Inventing global climate change to get cap-n-trade is.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
OK youve just proven completely that you get all your info and base your "opinions" on whatever right-wing radio and Fox News tell you. Who invented a crisis for healthcare reform? What crisis?? You're talking out of your ass entirely. And you think climate change is "invented"? Are you effing KIDDING me? And this whole giant global conspiracy just so they can get "cap and trade"?? Wow. Turn off the Rush Limbaugh, do yourself a favor and go back to school, cause your "logic" is suffering badly.
Circumvenscion 2 years ago
You are the one who basing your "opinions" the lies of the media. Tell me, how does less than 10% without medical insurance suddenly become a crisis? How does beating up on the health insurance companies lower the cost of healthcare? If we beat up on the car insurance companies, will it lower the cost of repairing car after an accident?
You want logic. Tell me, why is it now called "climate change" instead of global warming? I know, Do YOU?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
With unemployment OVER 10% and REAL unemployment closer to 20%, it's impossible that only "less than 10%", as you claim, are uninsured. Everyone who IS employed isn't insured, so the uninsured rate is being lowballed considerably. There's no way that with unemployment nearing 20% (REAL unemployment, not the unemployment benefit claims rate) that all those unemployed are insured, when those who are employed aren't even insured.
blog4change 2 years ago
How many are on Medicaid, S-chip and such?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Those people are included in the number of insured. Nationwide, an average of about 20-30% of the insured are covered by those programs you mentioned and Medicare. Just under 60% are covered by private insurance, and around 15% are uninsured.
blog4change 2 years ago
So the real question is why are they not insured?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
They either 1) can't afford it - a family policy for me and my kids would cost us upwards of $13k per year, IF we could get one (allergies, pre-existing condition = DENIED coverage from the get-go), 2) don't think they need it, or 3) don't realize they qualify for Medicaid. First things first, we ought to get everyone who qualifies onto Medicaid THEN worry about the rest, which will likely end up being a much smaller number of people
blog4change 2 years ago
I guess you need a better job then or should have had less kids. I have paid my own health insurance for decades and hardly ever used it. At the same time people go without insurance, but have mobile phones, flat screens, and real nice cars. Their choice is their problem.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
The real issue is not that people are uninsured, it's the COST of private insurance. Insuring everyone will spread the risk and, in turn, lower costs for everyone - as long as we make sure the private ins. companies can't gouge prices to meet their paltry 4% profit margin. Do you know what 4% of 100 billion is? It's enough to provide insurance for every person who is currently uninsured. And then some.
blog4change 2 years ago
It is not your money to spend on anyone. The profit belongs to those who make it. The cost of insurance is the result of higher medical care costs. If a company cannot make a profit, they will stop writing health insurance. Then what will people do?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@CommonSenseJoe
insurance companies are only making 2.5%. that makes them the 35th most profitable industry.
--i know this is your point. but some how this actual number is lost in pelossi blather of "obscene profits"
number sourced from FORTUNE 500 top compaies of 2008
theMETALDOVE 2 years ago
@theMETALDOVE
I know. This is all about covering up that Medicare is quickly going broke. When government takes over all of healthcare, they can hide this fact in the numbers.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@CommonSenseJoe ~ lol, medicare is not a 'for profit' entity. it's tax dollars, duh! the current private insurance company skims 35% off hospitals, doctors, and patients and gives no tangible service or product toward your health.
how can medicare go broke if we spent a trillion dollars in iraq?
you know, at one time common sense thought the universe revolved around the earth, and it also thought the earth was flat... hell, even a jack ass has common sense.
tomitstube 2 years ago
@tomitstube
No, they don't. Insurance companies provide a service. You don't have to use their service if you don't want to. Pay all your medical bills out of your own pocket and keep the 35% for yourself!
Insurance companies charge premiums and then accept the obligation to pay your medical bills within specific limitations. They don't skim off the providers. They negotiate certain price structures, but they don't skim.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@CommonSenseJoe ~ you don't understand the profit principle of private health insurance? yes, they SKIM 35% of all money in the health care system. it's profit. they may or may not cover you to suck 35 cents out of every dollar. thousands lose their coverage every week, a million a year go bankrupt due to medical bills and 80% of them have insurance. 45,000 die each year because they can't get treatment or care. 83% of the uninsured work.
you can slink around these facts all you want.
tomitstube 2 years ago
@tomitstube
Those are not "facts" but statistical frauds. No one dies from a lack of health insurance. Even people with good health insurance die.
I understand the difference between profit and overhead. It is not skimming to pay your employees or to advertise or to protect yourself from the government.
Most insurance companies pay their claims. Some loss their coverage because they stop paying for it. Some because they LIED to get the coverage in the first place.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@CommonSenseJoe ~ "statistical fraud"? FACT. a harvard study found 45,000 americans die a year without treatable care. FACT. at free health clinics that thousands of people attend and drive hundreds of miles for, work. FACT 83% percent of them work with no insurance. FACT 2 and 3 jobs some of them. FACT some are litterally dying and most haven't seen a doctor in years. FACT a million file for bankruptcy every year for MEDICAL BILLS. FACT 4 OF 5 have private insurance.
tomitstube 2 years ago
@tomitstube Those who did the Harvard study have backed away from the conclusion that people for a lack of health insurance. I never said I was against free health clinics. Having insurance does not mean it won't ever run out or have limits.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@CommonSenseJoe cont. ~ harvard isn't backing off their study, what's your source? if anything they've considered the number of people dying without access to treatable care is probably higher than 45,000 a year.
we are talking about health care. the ability of u.s. citizens and their access to seeing a goddamn doctor, not buying fucking tires or a goddamn snow cone at the tasty freeze.
tomitstube 2 years ago
@tomitstube - Look it up. Those who produced the study are saying the Democrats have misrepresented their conclusions. They pulled data from several old studies and combined it with highly subjective judgments.
I have not said that there is not a problem. The question is what is the REAL problem and what caused it. I believe it is the GOVERNMENT that cause the problem so I find it hard to believe that THEY are the solution.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
so commonjoe, how bad does that make the private health care industry if they can't even handle half the population.
call it what you want, private care is useless, it costs money and lives. defend this crap i you want, i don't care. i've run circles around on this and all you can muster is fear for the government nonsense. it's obvious our tax dollars are clearly heads about the private market in health care.
you're defending an utter failure.
tomitstube 2 years ago
@tomitstube Give me your solution! You want total government control over AL healthcare? Fine, then be prepared for high costs, less care, and more people dying.
Think about what people do to get S.S. disability, and that will be the claims service you will get from the government.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@CommonSenseJoe ~ it's "intellectual dishonest", as sherrod brown mentions here. altho, i have a hard time with the intellectual part.
here's something you've probably been sheltered from. 1/2 of all americans are currently getting their health care thru one from of government program or another.
50% of all americans get their health care thru the government. "socialized medicine"? seems to working just fine. lol, you didn't even notice we were already socialist".
tomitstube 2 years ago
@tomitstube The programs are NOT working fine. They are going broke, cutting reimbursements, and losing providers. They are not even socialist programs because those involved are not even paying for them AT ALL!
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@CommonSenseJoe ~ how do you get health coverage by lying? that's one of the most ignorant things i've ever heard. hospitals and doctors are now requiring money up front. i know someone with stomach cancer who was told he needed to come up with $15,000 to get a 2nd operation. HE HAD PRIVATE COVERAGE!!!!! they wouldn't provide the treatment without the cash.
that's your crappy ass private health care system, pull you head out of you ass, does it have to happen to you to get it?
tomitstube 2 years ago
@tomitstube Obviously, you hate private insurance. I get that. If you lie on your application and conceal a pre-existing condition, you can be canceled. I did not say that there are not problems. My point was only that it is not caused by the health insurance companies.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@CommonSenseJoe ~ of course i hate the private health system. it's a crappy product that has no value, it's a dysfunctional bogged down, crooked, denying everything system, that as common policy chooses profit over treatment for the sick, it charges too much, it takes too much, and it leaves half this countries citizens under-insured and choosing between seeing a doctor or just hoping a condition just gets better. they skim billions off already out of control costs. it's a scam, and a racket.
tomitstube 2 years ago
@tomitstube - So what is your answer? Socialized medicine where the government will determine your care for you?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
you are a fucking retard, you think the problem is in the insurance sector, how about regulations that make Hospitals and doctors not refuse treatment, and not require insurance in the fucking first place? problem solved for free
hugegiantfrogs 2 years ago
Yes, the problem is with INSURANCE. Insurance is not HEALTH CARE, it's a fucking racket. It doesn't even guarantee ACCESS to health care. Hospitals not refusing treatment has NOTHING to do with insurance costs. Hospitals and insurance cos are NOT one and the same. Hospitals loss from indigent patients has NO effect on insurance premiums, it only affects the hospital's bottom line.
blog4change 2 years ago
If you have issues with health insurance than don't buy any. Just don't whine when you go broke from medical bills.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Yeah, they "invented" the "hoax" of climate change DECADES ago, in order to pass a flimsy carbon tax bill in 2009. Riiiiiiight.
blog4change 2 years ago
He speaks the truth here, Democrats may be often incompetent or idiotic, but by and large it IS THE REPUBLICANS who are the biggest bunch of intellectually dishonest pieces of crap in the congress. They obstruct everything, scream bloody murder over everything, and will lie, distort, and exaggerate anything in order to fire up their narrow-minded, uneducated and wholly ignorant base. It works time and time again, so they have no reason to try any other strategies. Only education will stop them.
Circumvenscion 2 years ago
You are delusional. Democrats have lied to their own time and time again. Obama has not done a single thing he promised. He never intended to do it. He is not ending the war. He is not repealing the DOMA. He has not even closed Gitmo yet.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
What the hell does Obama have to do with a discussion over which PARTY is more intellectually dishonest. As I said, Dems may be often incompetent or idiotic and yes of course they have lied, but if you pay any attention AT ALL you will notice that the Repubs are more more closed-minded, intellectually dishonest, and obstructionist. Their base is less educated and more emotional, what do you expect to be the natural outcome of that?
Circumvenscion 2 years ago
Republicans are "more closed-minded, intellectually dishonest, and obstructionist" and "Their base is less educated and more emotional". Who are you trying to kid? Democrats, especially liberals, run on only emotion. President OBama was elected on emotion. Any thinking person knew he was promising stuff he would NEVER deliver on.
This is the essential difference between the parties. Republicans have made mistakes, but they are telling the people the truth. Democrats have to lie.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Death Panels?
Socialism?
Government Takeover?
Pulling the plug on Grandma?
Mmm... so much Republican truth, where do I begin?
Circumvenscion 2 years ago
You people keep repeating the phrase "death panels" as if anyone said that they were actually in the bill. Palin was talking about the future when the government controls ALL of healthcare.
What do you call it when the government takes over private business and rewrites the laws given the union a share of the company while stealing it for others who PAID for it?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Umm - NO SHE WASNT. I'm sure Fox News failed to inform you, but she was referring to a SPECIFIC PASSAGE IN THE BILL which she twisted out of utter idiocy into saying that it would set up Death Panels which would decide who would live and who would die. Get your facts straight. There was a ton of discussion about that particular passage which sparked the whole Death Panel talk, it was in no way about some fictional "future". I can't believe you didnt know that -- oh wait, yes I can.
Circumvenscion 2 years ago
Again, she was talking about the future IF we go down the road to government paid for healthcare. I don't want the person who is treating me paid by the government who is trying contain costs.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Every day is opposite day in the United Republic of Wingnuttia, AKA Home of the Republican Party.
blog4change 2 years ago
FYI everyone: (un)CommonSenseJoe is an insurance company shill.
kaysandesses 2 years ago
Why am I a shill because I don't want the government running my healthcare. Are you an OBAMA SHILL? Why don't you think for yourself just this once, and ask a few questions.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
No Joe, you're a shill because you continue to post the same baseless, unsubstantiated rhetoric disseminated by the GOP, Faux News, and their handlers in the insurance industry. Then, you fail to back any of those assertions with supporting evidence and scurry off to somewhere else and post the same bullshit ad nauseum. That is why I label you a shill.
I'm not an Obama shill and don't like some of the things he does. However, I can back up everything I state with factual evidence.
kaysandesses 2 years ago
What would you like me to prove?
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Americans do not need Government reform!
Americans need to reform the Government!
They are all full of shit and all should be behind bars! These assclowns lie and the media swears to it. Too many idiots believe the bullshit coming out of the idiot box as truth and it couldn't be further from it! Wake up their all are liars.
Mrcharliebobo 2 years ago
lol his voice sounds vaguely like Alex Jones.
I have no point, I'm just sayin'
fl00ders 2 years ago
So this twit is tired of "intellectually dishonest Republicans"? Well, Republicans are tired of democrats ignoring facts, hiding the truth and lying through their teeth.
gbhobson 2 years ago
uh oh, somebody thinks Fox nooze is fair and balanced
integral 2 years ago
i wonder who lied about mobile weapopns production chambers that lead to a disasterous war. Oh yeah, as i recall it was the right. take time to reflect next time you want to bring up lies.
Kzastle 2 years ago
@kzastle ~ lmao...are you on crack?
gbhobson 2 years ago
I love when Democrats talk about "intellectual honesty". They have been lying about healthcare "reform" from the beginning. They know it and now the American people are learning it.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Care to supply some evidence, commie, or are you just mindlessly parroting crap you picked up from Fox?
integral 2 years ago
The whole thing has been a lie from the beginning. First, the President said it would not affect those who already have insurance. Now, with all the new requirements, MY premiums are going up. Second, no one actually believes you can cover more people and spend LESS. That is the height of intellectual dishonesty. Third, you cannot "cut" over 500 billion from Medicare and not reduce the benefits to seniors. This is a mathematical fact. This is and has always been a takeover of healthcare.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
500 billion in waste, fraud and abuse. That's not benefits to seniors, it's...waste fraud and abuse.
Also...do you seriously think if Congress does nothing to reform health care, that your premiums are not going to go up anyway?
GretchenDawntreader 2 years ago
Prove to me that there is 500 billion in waste, fraud and abuse first, and then prove you can find and deal with it. Until then, you cannot say you are saving anything, only cutting.
If the Congress would have reformed Medicare and Medicaid, that would have helped to solve the problem. Medical insurance goes up because MEDICAL COSTS go up. There is an average of 4% profit in health insurance. They are not the problem. Underpaying providers for Medicare patients is the problem.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
pays for itself?! hahahahahaha
ferrozm 2 years ago
you doubt facts?
Aspartame69 2 years ago
both parties suck
BUT... ....healthcare for everyone is good no matter how you slice it, no matter how much it costs.
we don't bitch about the cost to kill people but we bitch about the cost to save them.
i love how backwards politics are.
CliveSinclairZX 2 years ago 10
That's strange, Senator. There are alot of good folks in your state tired of the fucking soup line too. What are you doing about that?
It's the economy, stupid.
MrHelldogger 2 years ago
It's not "intellectually" honest. In fact, it's not honest in any way you can imagine. It's lying and that is as simple as it gets.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago 3
Lost his voice from telling the repubs to stop bitching in my opinion
GibbyLOLSTFUPLEASE 2 years ago