What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

President Obama, it's very simple.

danut

danut

Member
DiscoBiscuit said:
You see, conservatives are freedom takers too. They mandate social laws. Laws to divide, exclude, conquer.....all that. They want to mandate a god I don't worship at a courthouse I get busted in. They want to teach my kids that the earth is 4800 years old and jeebus is coming back to end the world but save the worthy.

Progressives mandate law to protect the average joe from the average greedy executive.

I fully understand a rich person arguing conservative rhetoric from a financial perspective. It's all about greed.

I don't understand the have nots whistling freedom and rights as a way to get by in a greedy corporate world. We've lost far more income and benefits in the last 30 years than freedom and rights.
Click to expand...
All of that is because of us being taught the left-right evaluation process.

liberal-conservative grading is a error. Both lead to slavery. The method of the slavery is economic, for the most part.

The true political spectrum runs from anarchy to totalitarinism. Lack of government to total government. It doesn't matter if the boot heal is red or blue. It's still a boot heal.
 
DiscoBiscuit

DiscoBiscuit

weed fiend
Veteran
But ain't it great that legalizing marijuana is gonna do what you say and make everything right?

You're arguing talking points from the first two pages. Same talking points, different debater. If you'd actually read my opinion, you'd already know I don't agree with yours. Saying it again, (even if you word it in the "I know you already know this" lecture) doesn't mean it carries any more weight the second time around.
 
danut

danut

Member
OK we disagree on those areas.

The current example that we have of government regulation of our health care is the FDA.

Do you believe that FDA regulation has made our health care more or less expensive?
Or haw about that great one liner "no accepted medical use?"
So status quo is good and more regulation would be even better.

The doctors union (the AMA) has so deeply entrenched itself that it is, pretty much, against the law to say "marijuana cures cancer." And if I try to keep someone alive I can be charged with a crime also.

This is a very powerful group. Think that group may have gained modifications in the law that would benefit them? Of course .. it's Washington DC. What else would you expect?

Only after this system has even more firmly protected itself will the people be allowed to benefit one iota.

Add to that the amendments that benefit drug and insurance companies and you got a whole lot of pork. And it'll get porked until it passes.

I just want my slice of the pork pie. I want the government to do something that benefits the people directly.

Nationwide medical marijuana.

DiscoBiscuit said:
But ain't it great that legalizing marijuana is gonna do what you say and make everything right?

You're arguing talking points from the first two pages. Same talking points, different debater. If you'd actually read my opinion, you'd already know I don't agree with yours. Saying it again, (even if you word it in the "I know you already know this" lecture) doesn't mean it carries any more weight the second time around.
Click to expand...
 
danut

danut

Member
Oh my GOD!!

Now they want to tax us simply for being alive!!

y RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR

WASHINGTON (AP) - Americans would be fined up to $3,800 for failing to buy health insurance under a plan that circulated in Congress on Tuesday as divisions among Democrats undercut President Barack Obama's effort to regain traction on his health care overhaul.

As Obama talked strategy with Democratic leaders at the White House, the one idea that most appeals to his party's liberal base lost ground in Congress. Prospects for a government-run plan to compete with private insurers sank as a leading moderate Democrat, Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, said he could no longer support the idea.

The fast-moving developments put Obama in a box. As a candidate, he opposed fines to force individuals to buy health insurance, and he supported setting up a public insurance plan. On Tuesday, fellow Democrats publicly begged to differ on both ideas.

Democratic congressional leaders put on a bold front as they left the White House after their meeting with the president.

"We're re-energized; we're ready to do health care reform," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., insisted the public plan is still politically viable. "I believe that a public option will be essential to our passing a bill in the House of Representatives," she said.

After a month of contentious forums, Americans were seeking specifics from the president in his speech to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday night. So were his fellow Democrats, divided on how best to solve the problem of the nation's nearly 50 million uninsured.

The latest proposal: a ten-year, $900-billion bipartisan compromise that Baucus, who heads the influential Finance Committee, was trying to broker. It would guarantee coverage for nearly all Americans, regardless of medical problems.

But the Baucus plan also includes the fines that Obama has rejected. In what appeared to be a sign of tension, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs pointedly noted that the administration had not received a copy of the plan before it leaked to lobbyists and news media Tuesday.

The Baucus plan would require insurers to take all applicants, regardless of age or health. But smokers could be charged higher premiums. And 60-year-olds could be charged five times as much for a policy as 20-year-olds.

Baucus said Tuesday he's trying to get agreement from a small group of bipartisan negotiators in advance of Obama's speech. "Time is running out very quickly," he said. "I made that very clear to the group."

Some experts consider the $900-billion price tag a relative bargain because the country now spends about $2.5 trillion a year on health care. But it would require hefty fees on insurers, drug companies and others in the health care industry to help pay for it.

Just as auto coverage is now mandatory in nearly all states, Baucus would require that all Americans get health insurance once the system is overhauled to make premiums more stable and affordable. Penalties for failing to do so would start at $750 a year for individuals and $1,500 for families. Households making more than three times the federal poverty level - about $66,000 for a family of four - would face the maximum fines. For families, it would be $3,800, and for individuals, $950.

Baucus would offer tax credits to help pay premiums for households making up to three times the poverty level, and for small employers. Upper middle-class households making between three and four times the poverty level would not have to pay more than 13 percent of their income for health insurance. People working for companies that offer coverage could avoid the fines by signing up.

Nonetheless, the fines pose a dilemma for Obama. As a candidate, the president campaigned hard against making health insurance a requirement, and fining people for not getting it.

"Punishing families who can't afford health care to begin with just doesn't make sense," he said during his party's primaries. At the time, he proposed mandatory insurance only for children.

White House officials have since backed away somewhat from Obama's opposition to mandated coverage for all, but there's no indication that Obama would support fines.

One idea that Obama championed during and since the campaign - a government insurance option - appeared to be sinking fast.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., told reporters a Medicare-like plan for middle-class Americans and their families isn't an essential part of legislation for him. Hoyer's comments came shortly after a key Democratic moderate said he could no longer back a bill that includes a new government plan.

That left liberals in a quandary. They've drawn a line, saying they won't vote for legislation if it doesn't include a public plan to compete with private insurance companies and force them to lower costs.

Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark., who once supported a public option, said Tuesday that after hearing from constituents during the August recess, he's changed his mind.

"If House leadership presents a final bill that contains a government-run public option, I will oppose it," Ross said.

Democrats are considering a fallback: using the public plan as a last resort if after a few years the insurance industry has failed to curb costs. That approach is also being pushed by Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, a moderate whose support could be critical to any health legislation.

Snowe said Tuesday that Obama's been open to her fallback idea.

"He's been receptive, recognizing that there's difficulties with the public option," Snowe said. Republicans have cast it as a government take-over.

Baucus is calling for nonprofit co-ops to compete in the marketplace instead of a public plan.

An 18-page summary of the Baucus proposal was obtained by The Associated Press. The complex plan would make dozens of changes in the health care system, many of them contentious. For example, it includes new fees on insurers, drug companies, medical device manufacturers and clinical labs.

People working for major employers would probably not see big changes. The plan is geared to helping those who now have the hardest time getting and keeping coverage: the self-employed and small business owners.

---_

Associated Press writers Erica Werner, Ben Feller, Alan Fram and Jim Abrams contributed to this report.
Click to expand...
 
hardhat22

hardhat22

Member
danut said:
Oh my GOD!!

Now they want to tax us simply for being alive!!
Click to expand...
It's all about the money,bro. Money is power. His administration is guilty of passing the largest tax increase in U.S. history. The loose tobacco tax went from $1.30 to $24.78 per pound. This taxed a huge percentage of us who roll our own because the cost of pre-rolled was so high. And they were well aware of that.

You may be surprised how many people out there truly believe that the govt SHOULD keep 48% of your income in order to pay for health care. I know,THEY say they can pay for this without raising taxes,but consider this; In 1965, Medicare (American) was projected to cost only 3.1 billion a year. Now,it's costing over 455 billion a year and almost bankrupt. Any proposal submitted by this admin will cost us dearly. THEY have a record for projecting costs,then later smile while explaining why they have to go 1000% over budget. Google "drug war costs" and "war on terrorism cost" to get a good idea. Big dig comes to mind also.

If you have doubts, research medicaid for a few minutes. I've been there and know exactly how farm animals feel. Google "Medicaid patients herded like cattle" to understand govt run health care.

People are dreaming if they believe big O gives a rats a$$ about them and their evil medical MJ. They want your money and obedience. If you are unwilling to comply, they will pass you on to the prison systems so cheney and gonzales can make money through vanguard and other prison systems. Either way....
Peace
 
L

lysol

hardhat22 said:
I thought I might add that if this health bill passes,we will be mandated,not offered to take out insurance.
Click to expand...

That's a flat out lie, sorry. Its a public option, if you already have insurance great, if not you CAN get this insurance. Just because you want to twist the meaning of the word "option" doesn't mean the millions of American's without healthcare should just die, JUST so hardhat22 doesn't have to worry about something thats not even in the bill.

You're worried about what exactly? That people are going to be forced to get affordable insurance and then coverage dropped? What would be the motive for the government to do that? Does the post office chuck your letter in the bin so they can save on delivery costs? Last time I checked they were the only one who can send me marijuana seeds from across the globe overnight for less than a buck, thats damn good service

We have that now with the private option, the public option allows people who lost their private options to switch plans. if you actually knew people who have fought expensive life threatening diseases and had to spend their last years arguing over insurance that was supposed to be promised, you would be speaking about the issues differently

And I think if they put pot on there they would statistically not have very many supporters, the issue is already partisan enough 50 / 50 support, and 50 / 50 people support pot, so if you combined them youd have 25 / 75 people who support both / vs people that dont support both




To the post below, so since it helps some people we should cancel it altogether? If you are disabled and had NO government plan, you'd be homeless from paying bills or sick and in the emergency room with $10k in bills for an overnight stay since you couldnt get prescriptions, think about it. If we have no public option, how can we justify an FDA telling us what the fuck to do, if they are going to deny me from treating my own life threatening disease with a medicine without a doctor, I better well have my way paid to a doctor. It's like extortion, they won't let you get your medicine without paying off the big insurance company

Obviously you weighed the benefits of keeping the "flaky" medicare over paying your own way, since you had a CHOICE, without having the government plan you would have had NO CHOICE

In other words they artificially inflated this industry, and you are fighting to help them save a couple bucks at the expensive of dying citizens who can't afford the right care and treatments.

hardhat22 said:
I can say from personal experience that anyone who is on meicaid/medicare knows full well they are dealing with govt. I've been disabled and on medicaid off and on for a few years.Off and on because it is a constant struggle to stay covered.There are accidental terminations,terminations due to incorrect data and the ever present unknown terminations,all of which requires you to re-apply and do the waiting period again.Govt beauracracy at it's finest.

Then there is the scant drug coverage which requires a doc to prescribe generics when possible.Regardless of what you read online,generics aren't always all they're cracked up to be.Anything that can be addictive was never approved for me,so I had to find alternative therapies to xanax and ambien.Hence OG and IC mag,Lol.

Alot of us don't care whether a damnocrat or repug sponsors this bill,or even pretend there is a difference in the 2.This is just a power play plain and simple.I don't want to give them this inch because there is no doubt that there is a way for them to stretch it for 10 miles,it's their method of operation.

I would have no problem with medicaid being expanded to include the working man/woman who pays for this system as long as it could be done without causing insurance corps to fail.I will ALWAYS be against them
forcing us to accept it.They are talking about a $1000+ fine for not accepting it.Is this the form of governance we really want,to be protected whether we want to be or not? Sounds like marijuana laws to me.
Peace
Click to expand...
 
hardhat22

hardhat22

Member
lysol said:
That's a flat out lie, sorry. Its a public option, if you already have insurance great, if not you CAN get this insurance. Just because you want to twist the meaning of the word "option" doesn't mean the millions of American's without healthcare should just die, JUST so hardhat22 doesn't have to worry about something thats not even in the bill.
You're worried about what exactly?
Click to expand...
About one more loss of choice. Another chink in the armor of freedom that our ancestors fought so hard to procure and maintain. Sorry can't be any more explicit or cheesier than than that.:D
And don't blame me about it being mandated(forced),it's not my idea. Blame all the closet maoists out there. And here's an idea;If people are so scared of death and bad health,they can move to Massachussets where health insurance is already forced.Btw,they (Massachussets)still haven't gotten all the dissenters in jail yet.Turns out,that there were far fewer people in Massachussets willing to comply with communistic/socialist/liberal ideals. Hats off to them.

Just out of curiousity,do supporters of the govt run health care also support the mandatory community service Obama and Romney have dreamed of? The same program that will ban religious observances to those in service? How do you justify the American govts removal of freedom of religion for any length of time? Our govt was not designed to control every aspect of our lives.But look around us.We can't even choose to use an herb as medicine if we want. Not many choices left for them to take away....
Latest news preceding tonights speech. http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/09/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5296789.shtml
Peace
 
O

otherwhitemeat

Public Option simply means that those of you that have good coverage from your employers today will have to make sacrfices. Costs will go up, your out of pocket will increase and welfare moms will be able to breed like rabbits without limitation while we pick up the tab for the 'greater social good'

You really don't think Obama can ask the Doctors or Hospitals to make that sacrifice, do you? HE'S A LAWYER!!!! Public Option just means 'public pays' you will pay the cost in increased taxes, higher out of pocket costs, reduced coverage, and higher premiums.

Ask Canadians what they think about their healthcare and it's not the rosy picture Michael Moore would have you beleive. Sometimes, a person has to wait 6 months to see a specialist. Ask the British about their healthcare, if they can force a response past their socialist-addled teeth. Norway, yeah it works when your country has a few million people.

My coverage works fine for me, I really don't want to support the welfare rolls too. Beyond the right wing nutjobs screaming about death panels, there's a quiet majority of people like me---firmly middle class, that have no intent of allowing this to happen.

Mr Obama: why don't you stop worrying about shit that none of us care about and figure out a way to 'withdraw with honor' from WWIII?

If 48% of our country wants to have Universal Healthcare, let them start voluntarily paying extra taxes. Hm? I can't hear you over the deafening silence? Mr. Moore? Mr. Penn? Mr. Baldwin? Ms. Garofalo? Anyone want to send in a voluntary check and start sponsoring people to have an unlimited number of children on the TAXPAYER dime?

Ridiculous that we're even wasting time discussing Universal Coverage with all the problems we have....
 
DiscoBiscuit

DiscoBiscuit

weed fiend
Veteran
owm, there are 1300 private insurance companies in the US. Each with their own specific hoop for health care providers to jump through administrative-wise for compensation.

The top three rejected 40%, 30% and 28% of their filed claims respectively. That's not folks with no health insurance getting rejected. That's folk's with health insurance, playing the game, paying their premiums and then getting rejected.
 
O

otherwhitemeat

DiscoBiscuit said:
owm, there are 1300 private insurance companies in the US. Each with their own specific hoop for health care providers to jump through administrative-wise for compensation.

The top three rejected 40%, 30% and 28% of their filed claims respectively. That's not folks with no health insurance getting rejected. That's folk's with health insurance, playing the game, paying their premiums and then getting rejected.
Click to expand...


Almost all large claims get rejected first time, just have to appeal. I've had this before, on some very expensive shit while my Dad was dying and getting transplants. He had to do several other surgeries first. I am a de facto expert on managing my families' healthcare. Had some crazy shit myself recently and asked my Doctor to handle it, he assigned and case worker and HE got paid! Is the new law going to ensure that more people get approved on the first filing? Oh goody! I wasn't aware that was part of it!

Does anyone here like the administration of taxes? Of warfare? Or the DMV? Or Social Security? Or Pensions? Or 401K? (I could go on like this for hours)

In fact, name one thing that's run by the government than RUNS WELL?!?!

If Obama and the Dems were serious about this they wouldn't be bandying about half-hearted solutions like a penalty for non-insurance.

I can cure the problem overnight:

1) Make it illegal to collect insurance BEFORE care is administered. Just bill me for it, my employer will take care of it.
2) Make it illegal for hospitals and Doctors to ask or turn away indigents (those without insurance)


After all, we are all going to pay for it anyway--maybe the wealthy doctors, hospitals, and drugs companies should foot the bill.

Public Option will bankrupt our country within ten years...just watch. Gotta stop those wars first if you are going pay for it. I hope I am wrong, but in your heart you know I am not.
 
DiscoBiscuit

DiscoBiscuit

weed fiend
Veteran
BCBS has 90% of the business in my state. Last year, the chief executive was paid $17 million. He won't get rich as fast as he's used to but who cares?

We're gonna get a public option so we can buy insurance just like the lucky ones. No hand outs, no welfare mothers, no boogie man, yada yada.
 
O

otherwhitemeat

DiscoBiscuit said:
BCBS has 90% of the business in my state. Last year, the chief executive was paid $17 million. He won't get rich as fast as he's used to but who cares?
Click to expand...

So, it's OK because he's rich? What if we changed the definition of 'rich'? Like when the AMT used to progressively tax the rich and all it does now is screw the middle class? Slippery slope, my friend.

What does our government do so well, that you would want to use that as a model for the provision of healthcare? Seriously...

Hurricane Katrina response? Prohibition? Drug reform? Schools? Killing Bin Laden (Clinton AND Bush tried)? Cash for Clunkers? Bank bailouts? C'mon seriously...just ask yourself...beyond the smooth sales pitch you're about to get tonight: what if it doesn't work like they say it's going to? You KNOW it won't!!!

Vietnam? Financial regulations? Mortgage bailouts? FAA regulations? FDA? CDC? FEMA? None of it works right, we just accept ineffeciency because it's the government.
 
DiscoBiscuit

DiscoBiscuit

weed fiend
Veteran
Government takes obscene profit out of the picture. The same profit that makes health insurance so expensive and impossible to get for almost 50 million people. If the private sector won't do it then government has to.

I noticed the examples of bad government above. I also noticed you carefully left out medicaid, medicare and social security. Those three programs alone do more to help the little guy than all the boogie man stuff you could type in a lifetime.
 
O

otherwhitemeat

DiscoBiscuit said:
Government takes obscene profit out of the picture. The same profit that makes health insurance so expensive and impossible to get for almost 50 million people. If the private sector won't do it then government has to.

I noticed the examples of bad government above. I also noticed you carefully left out medicaid, medicare and social security. Those three programs alone do more to help the little guy than all the boogie man stuff you could type in a lifetime.
Click to expand...


Social Security? I've paid into every day since I was 13. I won't see a dime, it will be bankrupt by the time I retire or about 2041 by most estimates. So I paid all of that money and won't get anything back. Fair?

Medicare? That will be bankrupt by 2020 or thereabouts. I won't use it, but I pay for it every week. Fair?

Medicaid? Uh, how many people uninsured in this country? 60M poor people uninsured. Sound like a failure to you? Aren't we all already paying for indigent care? I do, every paycheck. Also won't ever use it. Fair?

Not boogey men, actual facts...think for yourself. You are being sold a bill of goods...you won't get guaranteed healthcare. People like me will just get taxed more and will all vote for Republicans in four years...as much as the thought of that disgusts me too.
 
Bacchus

Bacchus

Throbbing Member
Veteran
We just accept HIGH COST HEALTH INSURANCE because it is capitalism??? WTF

Capitalism killed democracy.
 
DiscoBiscuit

DiscoBiscuit

weed fiend
Veteran
It's a cycle. Ever since the 80s we've let the right talk us into deregulation and tax cuts. It's all blown up in our faces. Everybody knows it but some won't admit. We'll lean back toward increased regulation for greedy industry, just like the years following the great depression.

We'll have sustainable growth for a few decades and greedy capitalism will get it's foot back in the door. Some Hollywood b actor will come along and preach the evils of big government. Lots of folks will have forgotten the evils of unregulated capitalism and it's off to the races again.

A simple look at the last 120 years of economic bust and recovery paints a distinct picture. Which side of the aisle you stand determines what you see.
 
ItsAllOver

ItsAllOver

Devil's Advocate
Ok so to preface my entrance into this debate, I'll say:
- I am not a democrat, and I am not a republican. It is sad that so much of the debate thus far has centered on partisan name-calling. As someone said before, doesn't matter which totalitarian boot heel is on your face, red or blue. I'm tired of people arguing that government is the answer when it comes to actually running anything. Government's role should be as a regulator, providing for common welfare, but staying out this business of running things. Our government is run by bureaucrats, not experts in health care. ("Our government is run by bureaucrats, not experts in...") People do not have a right to health insurance (or health care), you must achieve it for yourself. You must face this fact: the world will never be perfect. Sometimes people (sometimes YOU, and sometimes ME) are going to get fucked. It's that simple.
I am not a christian or god believer (yuck) either, so DB leave it alone. You are showing how narrow minded you are every time you introduce this into the discussion. I also often think that people that show what I consider to be ignorant viewpoints are probably religious. Comes with the territory, but it is irrelevant to this discussion.

Listen, about capitalism killing democracy. That's simply not true. The economic system that we have today in America is frequently called capitalism, but it is not, and I'm tired of hearing it. It is an uninformed viewpoint based on constant media pummeling and bad education.
You can blame capitalism for the mortgage crisis->economic disaster all you want, but the fact is government facilitated the risk-taking in these industries. You don't believe it, you've got your head up your ass.
You can say that capitalism is causing health care to be expensive, but the fact is that FDA regulation is cumbersome and causes costs to be sky-high. In addition, who said that capitalism means "no government regulation/restriction at all!"? Why can't we settle for government regulation of the health insurance industry in the same manner that it regulates costs for the mandatory automobile insurance? Why does government run health care have to be the reality when gov't could stick to its role as a regulator?

Now I'm just getting in here, so I'll have to catch up over time, but:
Disco: You said,
"If the public option passes and gives me a single less choice than I already have now, I won't lose anything. Seriously though, less choice means less opportunity for the private sector to financially rape me and then deny coverage after I've paid the damn policy for christ sakes."
That's selfish. What about those that are not you, and lose choices in health care that had what they considered to be good health care? Fuck them?
Also, can you give a little background on what you were denied, and what your policy stipulated? I bet it's in black and white that based on the policy you bought and signed, that you weren't covered for these costs. However, I don't know.

Also, you said "If the private sector won't do it (anything) then government has to." What makes you think that is true? Government is there to fulfill our every need if we can't find it elsewhere?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top