Hail to the Chief!

General Discussion
201

???
“Welfare queens?” Totally irrelevant to the debate at hand.

I cannot in my wildest dreams imagine that anybody would willingly remain long term on welfare, but I know that some do. IMHO race is irrelevant. Every population of any kind has a certain portion that would rather live on handouts than make the effort to better themselves.

It isn’t “government providing for” that I’m against. It’s government taking large amouunts of our earned income and shoveling it into grants for special interest groups, porkbarrel projects, personal projects aimed toward their camp[aign contributors and those that can muster votes, and countries hostile to us that I have a problem with. Eliminate those items and we’d have enough to support those programs that truely are needed, like medicare and social security.

And, not to be redundant, but Obamacare isn’t providing us with anything. It’s forcing us to buy something that many people simply cannot afford.

202

Obamacare is doing a few things:

-It’s keeping sick people from being dropped from their insurance when they get sick.

-It’s allowing people with preexisting conditions to get health insurance.

(BTW, if Republicans had solved these two problems while Bush was in office, we would have no Obamacare.)

-It’s allowing people to keep their adult sons and daughters on their family insurance until the age of 25. (or is it 26?) For young people who have graduated from college and are starting their first jobs, this is HUGE. These people often can’t get their own insurance right away, and even if they can, it’s often less expensive to stay on your parents’ insurance than purchase an individual policy.

Yes, Obamacare expands Medicaid, but outside of that, it merely makes it possible for people to purchase their own insurance.

The idea that it is ethical to make a profit from sick people needs to be put to death. The free market is a wonderful thing when it comes to cars, homes, and many other products and services, but the free market has failed in the healthcare arena. Letting healthcare be managed by profiteers leads to death and suffering, the things healthcare is designed to mitigate.

One of my conservative friends is bemoaning that she doesn’t know where she is going to find the money to pay for health insurance. This disturbs me because she is a mother of four children, and in my view, when you have children, taking good care of your children means taking good care of yourself so you will continue to be there for them.

When people choose not to purchase health insurance, they are choosing to burden the state and community hospitals when something inevitably goes wrong. It’s not a matter of “if.” It’s a matter of “when,” and those who have been choosing to think they can cheat fate will no longer be able to burden the rest of us with their foolish gamble.

203
I cannot in my wildest dreams imagine that anybody would willingly remain long term on welfare, but I know that some do.

Unfortunately some have and do. They fixed the whole where you’d get MORE money on welfare when you had another child. There were many mothers who would want to have more kids to get more money. It DID happen.

Now here in NH where the cost of living is higher then other parts of the country…you don’t see a lot of people lining up for welfare. But other parts of the country where the cost of living is lower…you could survive on welfare. It did happen.

One of my conservative friends is bemoaning that she doesn't know where she is going to find the money to pay for health insurance.

I have a friend who’s a STAUNCH conservative republican living in Manchester who has 2 kids and does NOT have any insurance. So what does he do when the kids get sick…they go to Catholic Medical Center…He doesn’t make too much money so the visit is FREE. FREE for HIM…but we as NH tax payers are paying for it. But he seems to always have enough money for trips to Foxwoods…and stacks of scratch lottery tickets every week.

I’m NOT really into forcing everyone into buying insurance…I’d like to see a way of not allowing people to take advantage of the system though.

204

“Eliminate those items and we’d have enough to support those programs that truely are needed, like medicare and social security.”

I disagree. Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are larger than anything else in the budget - even defense spending. I don’t see any way to afford them and not have budget deficit increases without revenue increases.

Don’t you mean Romneycare? He was first to implement it, so we should give him credit for it. When the Clintons first tried to get single payer health insurance, I thought they were all wet. We should take advantage of the existing insurance network and use the insurance companies. We finally have that. Can’t afford? Maybe. But who will pay for their care when they show up at the emergency room? It will be you and me, and the cost will be much higher than if they had bought health insurance earlier and used it when needed.

205

At least the model in Mass is working and the majority seem to like it. It becomes affordable because of mandatory enrollment with index fees based upon ability to pay. Most importantly, 80% of the fees must go toward healthcare. Saying that some people can’t afford it is technically correct if low wage earners prefer the option to use that money to buy beer and depend upon emergency room care.

The fact is, the rest of us cannot afford to do nothing. Doing nothing is a plan that we know doesn’t work. We pay more for healthcare then any industrial nation per capita with the worse out comes. That’s a bad deal. Pay more and let people die is a bad investment on human resources. The biggest driver of high Medicare cost is the lack of preventable care by the uninsured before they reach 65. 80% of the cost of healthcare goes for preventable deseases with diabetes leading the way.

Doing nothing is not an option ! Btw, please look up to the Genisis of Romney care. He was forced into it when the Bush administration threatened to cut hundreds of millions of dollars from their Medicaid. He and Kennedy working together offered the single payer plan as an alternative. Even the Bush administration realized that it would cut expenses and Medicaid payments. Romney was forced to accept key provisions as part of the plan when the democratically controlled state legislature over rode his vetos. Our state could not get mandates and other parts past, .our state’s plan suffered and is relatively non functional for the majority.

If Romeny had won the election and got a chance to enact his own Medicaid cutting portions, his own healthcare bill in Mass would cease to exist as a viable option for Mass uninsured citizens. …and many of their early deaths would undoubtedly be added to the roles.

206

No.45 would be a fair tax(this would tax everybody the same) abolish the IRS,the current tax structure forces a lot of conservative companies into other countries were kickbacks and low taxes go a long ways(eliminate the war on drugs? the cartels and organized crime wont allow it-think Bugsy and Al) No.46 would be to fix healthcare,it can be done(a good beginning would be to reduce gov’t role in healthcare) and the list goes on.
The unemployment figures are a bit misleading,some will say nay,but when some folks can get $300 plus dollars a week for 99 wks and the other perks,there is a disincentive to work-Kevin

207

Kev…I hear your frustration. But, how would reducing the govt. role help when healthcare costs have skyrocketed because of lack of regulations ? My contention has always been that we do not need a govt. run healthcare plan…but. It does need to be non profit and regulated and pay outs based on outcomes and not treatment number. Local govts do a much better job with law enforment and fire protection because they are more tightly regulated local non profits. The same can be done for healthcare. You don’t expect to privatize defense, law enforcement and fire protection, all done for citizen protection where only those can afford get the benefits. Why privatize healthcare where only those who can afford it get the benefits of living.

The true libertarian believes the main function of govt. is for defense. If healthcare isn’t defense of the citizenry from death, what the heck is ? Private for profit healthcare promotes profit…non profit can be regulated to promote health without the burden of turning a profit which skews the entire system away from it’s intended
purpose.

Right now, there are too many of us who think the poor are hording all of our money…don’t think so. Putting money before people’s health is always more expensive in the long run. Keeping people healthy is always more cost efficient, and better for everyone. Providing healthcare for all is the right investment; investing in people always shows the best return.

208

What’s wrong with the IRS? They are people and just do the job that Congress gave them.

209

When we start singing the praises of free enterprise and non govt. intervention in the workings of private business, remember this; it’s private enterprise that engages in the minimally regulated and overuse of high fructose corn syrup in foods. This additive is considered to be one of if not the greatest contributor to obesity and diabetes. Diabetes and it’s related ailments is the single biggest cost in healthcare.

Govt. doesn’t do it, food industries do. It’s often the lack of regulation that kills and causes untold suffering and high expense.

210

Don’t blame high fructose corn syrup, sure it inhibits the satisfaction factor so you want to drink more, but come on people have to get a brain about the correlation between calorie consumption and weight gain. WATER when you are thirsty!

211

Thats my point make the IRS unecessary its another level of uneeded bureaucracy.My livelyhood has been rotating around bureaucracy all my life -the more the bureaucrats take,the less I get.We have too many unelected bureaucrats,think about all this fondling you get at airports now and you might get a fine if someone digs through your trash and finds a can that wasnt recycled.
No thanks to meddlesome bureaucrats,I already have enough people telling me what to do-Kevin

212

"coorelation between calory intake and weight gain…water when you are thirsty"
Barkydog…I wish it was that simple. Scientific test have shown that mammals, in cluding us, gain more weight from HFCS then the exact same caloric intake of other sweeteners, including ordinary sugar. Next, try to find drinks without HFCS. It also increases the level of acceptance making these foods habit forming in eating while making it very difficult for the young to eat foots that are better for them. Kids raised on this stuff are often making natural foods taste like sawdust, including water. They are now on a path to obesity.

We did this denial with cigarette smoking for years and years too while thousands/ millions suffered from their effects. I don’t blame high fructose corn syrup no more then I blame the cigarette. I blame the profiteers who put money before public Heath and sell and promote it without regard to it’s risk.

213

Do diet drinks have high fructose corn syrup? If I’m drinking soft drinks, that’s all I drink. Straight fruit juices won’t have HFCS in them either. And unsweetened coffee or tea won’t have HFCS.

214

If I had my way, I would take all the people over 65 who complain about universal healthcare plans, and give back to them all their donations with interest and COLA they made to Medicare through out their life and tell them…you’re now on your own. Go find some one in the private sector to unsure you without any provisions of oBamacare now in place. It is estimated that many pay into Medicare as much as $250k if they worked continuously.That might get you one bypass surgery while you live with your kids.

If you can’t find someone…“Just don’t get sick. If you do, die early” Alan Grayson

215

Good post Dag,its strange what some people can complain about,we can basically get done what we need done.Sometimes it costs us most everything we have"so it goes" if it hadnt been for all the abuse heaped on the benevolent private insurers early on,dont think things would be quite so bad now.Some of the practitioners may complain that they are practically destitute,I find it strange that they own horse farms,2nd homes,hunting camps,airplanes,etc;Not knocking them,they deserve good compensation for the services they render,but it seems a fair amount have lost thier ideals.
What happened to the community hospitals? The community paid for these things,now Corps own them and they are geared for max profit.(we dont have any community hospitals left)-Kevin

216

Kevin, thanks. In the last 11 years, the two populations that have suffered the least from where they were at the beginning were the wealthy and those on Social Security and Medicare. The fed kept their bargin with the retirees.

Kevin, you are absolutely right in your observations. Community hospitals that service the uninsured are reembursed by the local and federal govt. to keep running. That and Medicaid are the only things that help every state even approach balancing their budgets and states have pulled back support of community hospitals. Our state gets $1.4 dollars back fom the fed for every $1 it sends in. Much of this is in Medicaid and Hospital reimbursement because of our high elderly population who refuse to die early.

217

Some things seem so obvious to me

and apparently quite a few others as well

218

Thanks RK,I just lost a lengthy diatribe I had typed up,this sure got my dander up.
No.47 would be strict term limits and no actual tenure for politicians,
“Old Virginny” sure suprised me on this go around, I’ll have to say I’m not exactly displeased the way things turned,suprised yes, but not displeased-The people have spoken-Kevin

219

No big answers there. Like I said the clustering of wealth at the top is a bigger problem I think than the unemployment rate.

60 minutes did that story on that company that was having trouble finding qualified people that could run CNC equipment and so on. Claimed they couldn’t afford to do the training so expected someone else like maybe the public schools or vo techs paid for by the future employees to do it. Then at the end gave the wage rate they were offering: $12 per hour. Maybe that’s ok in Texas or New Mexico, but that’s really not a competitive wage.

220

I hear you. When I taught, My cousin, a local businessman, used to complain to me because he didn’t get enough qualified students to do the work he wanted for the wage he was paying. "My response; up your wage and you’ll get the better students. The free market is a b…ch isn’t it ? "