Obama: It's OK to borrow to pay for health care

[bodypilot90 0]

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j8db-x8aZtGaU-FOMlbG5cSsIRWQD98NETP00

Quote

would carve out about $2.5 trillion worth of exemptions for Obama's priorities over the next decade. His health care reform plan also would get a green light to run big deficits in its early years. But over a decade, Congress would have to come up with money to cover those early year deficits.

This guy is nuts!

[tkhayes 348]

not at al. Borrowing to start up a new health care system is what would need to happen. People in the end would pay for it, instead of payments to private health insurance companies, the net would be made in tax payments.

his argument is that it can be done for everyone at a lower price than it is today. since all government costs are eventually borne by the taxpayer, the cost to the taxpayer eventually will go down. Including you.

you are just paying a different 'insurance company' for a different 'insurance policy'

nothing nuts about it. dozens of other 'civilized countries are already doing it, and we are the ones with the problem.

the problems will be:
1. getting approval in the USA for such a plan when there are so many right wing nut-jobs that think this country SHOULD be every man for himself.....
2. how to actually transition, effectively putting insurance companies out of business.

[kbordson 8]

Quote

the problems will be:
1. getting approval in the USA for such a plan when there are so many right wing nut-jobs that think this country SHOULD be every man for himself.....
2. how to actually transition, effectively putting insurance companies out of business.

There are A LOT bigger problems than the "right wing nut-jobs." But it's so much easier to simplify and demonize those with opininions different from yours.

But, since you seem to think that there are only two problems and one of them is a part of the American population themselves... then by all means, make all changes that YOU seem to think would be best. (sarcasm there... I am in NO WAY granting you approval to make my vote for me)

[TomAiello 26]

What you are proposing would basically put all the small insurance companies out of business, and lump all the money, power and decision making into what is already, right now, the largest insurer, the one that is primarily responsible for the current situation.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[Lefty 0]

Just wait until everyone has to wait six months (and counting) for a something as simple as a dental exam like I have to do with the VA. I've even been in the highest priority group due to my deployment.

Hooray for hope and change.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Gawain 0]

Good grief...after witnessing how the government has handled Stimulus I, II, the car companies, the banks, and AIG...you want them to decide for your health care?

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[jerryzflies 0]

Quote

Good grief...after witnessing how the government has handled Stimulus I, II, the car companies, the banks, and AIG...you want them to decide for your health care?

If the previous government had been competent, this government wouldn't have had to handle any of those things.

Obama's government didn't create the longest recession since the 1930s.

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

[bodypilot90 0]

I wonder if you would be for Obama opening a tax funded dz on your airport. After all he feels education should be free, aff is learning. Train pilots as jump pilots and auto workers as aff instructors and dealership mechanics as riggers. jumps say $8, Aff $100. maybe use military AC as jump planes

Quote

nothing nuts about it. dozens of other 'civilized countries are already doing it, and we are the ones with the problem.

Ever see the brits dental work. Would you want to wait months for a MRI? It isn't cheap and it's not fast and not all that good.

[Lefty 0]

Quote

Quote

Good grief...after witnessing how the government has handled Stimulus I, II, the car companies, the banks, and AIG...you want them to decide for your health care?

If the previous government had been competent, this government wouldn't have had to handle any of those things.

Obama's government didn't create the longest recession since the 1930s.

So you think another Bush won't come along sooner or later and mess things up again? Administrations change. Incompetent ones leave, woefully inexperienced ones come in, maybe a good one next, then incompetent, etc. Big difference between the last Bush and the next will be that the next one will have control of your health care. Isn't that a nice thought?

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[lawrocket 3]

Taking care of one's self and wanting to keep it that way makes me a right-wing nut job.

How awesome. Tell me, have I made any choices in my life for which you wouldn't have made a better one? You know better than me what is best for me, as well as what is best for you and everyone else.

I'm sorry for my failure to recognize the error of actually taking care of myself and my kids. That's your job.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Ion01 2]

Quote

not at al. Borrowing to start up a new health care system is what would need to happen. People in the end would pay for it, instead of payments to private health insurance companies, the net would be made in tax payments.

his argument is that it can be done for everyone at a lower price than it is today. since all government costs are eventually borne by the taxpayer, the cost to the taxpayer eventually will go down. Including you.

you are just paying a different 'insurance company' for a different 'insurance policy'

nothing nuts about it. dozens of other 'civilized countries are already doing it, and we are the ones with the problem.

the problems will be:
1. getting approval in the USA for such a plan when there are so many right wing nut-jobs that think this country SHOULD be every man for himself.....
2. how to actually transition, effectively putting insurance companies out of business.

Have you ever looked into how those other countries healthcare works? They refuse treatment all the time to people who really need it in order to cut cost! Obama himself admitted that someone like his mother would be refused a hip replacement if she had cancer and was in the hospital!! But since obama is RICH he would pay for his mothers hip replacement! Infact, if the doctors didn't follow the governments rules (performed a procedure they didn't authorize because the government didn't think it was worth it) the would loose thier license! He is modeling his plan after many European countries in which a easily treated desease which can cause blinded goes untreated until people are blind in one eye then the government will only spend enough money to save the other!
People have and continue to come from all over the world to this country for treatment because we have the best! beacause we have freedom!
Why should obama, or you, or anyone else get to decide what is best for me!!!! We are supposed to be free! That means I should be free to live without health care if I want or free to pay a little to have a little healthcare if I want etc. Its supposed to be my choice.
Just because you or obama thinks they know what is best for everyone doesn't mean that everyone should have to do what he or you says! This removes our freedom!
This country became the great country it is not by taking peoples freedoms away but because of freedom. This is why people come here. This is why the average home has 2 cars and 3 TV's!
The economic experts are now saying that his huge stimulus package has stiffled the recovery of the economy. He is doing the same things done in the great depression which actually made the great depression last longer!!! Look up the study by UCLA on FDR.
Obama has tried to demonize freedom by demonizing businesses and "rich" people (obama himself is incredibly rich yet he got rich by living off our tax dollars like all the others in office) who got to where they are with hard work and they pay and employee thousands and thousands of people. Who pays you for your job? A "greedy" rich guy. Who provides you all the amenities you enjoy and make your life easier? A greedy rich guy! (assuming they are really just greedy, maybe they want to help others by providing them jobs and good pay.....surely not...they can only be evil!)
If I am just going to pay a different insurance company for a different insurance policy then why can't I just pay that insurance company instead of the government TAKING my money from me. Why does the government always have to be the middle man?
I should have the freedom to choose what insurance company I use. When everyone has that freedom then everyone has the power! If an insurance company gets evil and greedy they get sued and people leave them for a different better company. If the government controls our insurance and money they have all the power and control!!!!!!!!!! We no longer have a choice and if they do something wrong they are the house and they always win!! We can't move our plan or money to anyone else because the government is all there is!
When has the government truely been trustworthy? What makes people think that politians are not greedy and business owners are? Politians got rich by taking your money where as you give businesses your money in exchange for a product! You don't have to give business your money but you have to give it to the government!
This is a classic case of the end justifies the means! They basically say its okay to take away freedoms because its whats best for everyone. (of course what is best for the individual is whats best for everyone....and that is individual freedom.) They do something wrong like take away freedom but they justify it by saying they will provide everyone with healthcare. Its still wrong!!! and a wrong never results in a right!!
And why should I have to pay for anyone elses healthcare. This is a free country which means you are free to make the wrong decision. Why should I pay for someone elses poor decision. Of course this also assumes that what I decide is the wrong decision is actually wrong! We are all different. We all live different live and make different decisions. Why should you or anyone else get to decide what is right or wrong for me!!!!! or anyone else! We are supposed to be free to make our own decisions and live with those consequences whether they are good or bad consequences. Why should the good results of my decision be penalized because someone else may bad decisions? Ultimately, this means no one will strive to better themselve because they will just be "punished" with higher taxes and regulations which means there will be no one to tax to pay for the others who have made bad decisions! This is why socialism doesn't work! Look at the other countries that do this.
Everyone talks about things being "fair".....well everyone is free to make thier own choices things are fair. Its not fair to take money from those who work hard and give it to those that don't! Its not fair to refuse treatment to people so the government can save money. Fair is everyone having the freedom to make thier own decision and build thier own lives the way they want to. Its not fair for the government to tell me what I should do with my money or determine my healthcare plan or whether I get treatment or not!
Sure call me a right wing nut job but history and facts have proven over and over that big government only means less freedom and worse lives for those who live under them! The founders of this country came here to get away from the type of government we currently have and its getting even bigger. You can call us names and try to paint us as evil but it doesn't change the facts and doesn't change whats wrong and right.
If someone is hungery should the government take money away from me, keep some for themselves and give some of it to the hungry person? Or should I take that person in and feed them of my own free will? Which is better for a hungry person: For the government to provide for thier need by taking away from everyone else and giving him no reason to provide for himself or for a business to give him a job so he can provide for himself which will give him the ability to also privide for others?
Right wing nut jobs like me would give the many a job where are others would make him a victim of the system.... a leach on society. Right wing nut jobs like me would take the time and effort to make him a contributor to society and provide him the means to better HIMSELF! That is what freedom is and how it works!

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

Good grief...after witnessing how the government has handled Stimulus I, II, the car companies, the banks, and AIG...you want them to decide for your health care?

If the previous government had been competent, this government wouldn't have had to handle any of those things.

Obama's government didn't create the longest recession since the 1930s.

Sorry dude...your deflection doesn't work. Past performance, regardless of perception, does not create a mandate to nationalize private industry.

The previous administration opened the door, which really disappoints me. President Bush punted......and basically left an invitation to the Obama administration to now own Chrysler, GM, Citigroup, AIG (already owned that one, but increased holdings) and put more spending on the block in the first hundred days, and set the stage for more debt than any other president ever.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[wmw999 2,460]

Quote

Obama himself admitted that someone like his mother would be refused a hip replacement if she had cancer and was in the hospital!! But since obama is RICH he would pay for his mothers hip replacement!

And in any system, if you're rich, you can pay for better care. Your choice has not been removed. The standard for universal basic care goes down, but the number of people who have cost-effective access to it goes up. The option to have additional care won't go away.

I'm not at all sure that nationalized health is either the panacea or horror that some are portraying. But there are a shitload of people out there who have extremely expensive healthcare, in part because they don't have reasonably easy access to inexpensive preventive care. And since they don't have that access, they don't have the habit -- that'll be something to deal with too.

Maybe, just maybe, reducing that extremely expensive care by replacing it with much less expensive basic care will reduce costs overall.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

If the previous government had been competent, this government wouldn't have had to handle any of those things.

Gee. We just had an incompetetent administration whose incompetence over everything it did caused such turmoil.

And you suggest that the way we fix it is to triple government's reach and involvement. Thus, the next GOP administration has even more to screw up.

Great thinking. "The government can't competently manage the financial markets or international relations, social security or infrastructure. Let's give the government healthcare to manage and you'll see an improvement."

Don't you want to make sure that the opportunity is not there for the next incompetent GOP admininistration to kill millions? To support socialized health care because government is incompetent sounds like outright misanthropy.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Ron 10]

And don't forget that several countries that have socialized medicine have been moving away from it. Your own home of Canada just was sued to allow private heathcare... England is looking to privatize some hospitals.

You think Social Security is being run well?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[tkhayes 348]

don't get me wrong - I am/was not a fan of the stimulus package. I am a fan of government run, single payer, nationalized health care.

[tkhayes 348]

dropzones are different. I am not for the government running business. I am for the government running HEALTH CARE, as well as education, the military, social services, and a few other things.

So no, I am not for the government running drop zones, car companies, gun manufacturing, widgets or whatever else private business shoudl be involved in.

SO we disagree on where the line is drawn on what is a right and what is a privilege or 'business'

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

Ever see the brits dental work. Would you want to wait months for a MRI? It isn't cheap and it's not fast and not all that good.

nothing wrong with leaving many services privatized as well. If you can afford the MRI, go to the clinic and pay for it. I have in the past, because I was denied by the large corporation that supposedly provides me with HEALTH COVERAGE, but does everything they can to NOT pay for it every time I need something.

[Ron 10]

Again, you think Social Security is working out?

Also, if you had the choice of have cancer treatments in the US or Canada.... Which would you choose?

I also take offense that you think that anyone that thinks an individual should try to take care of themselves is a "nut job"..... I think the world would be MUCH better off if people tried to handle their own issues instead of expecting others to fix their problems.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Lefty 0]

Have we, out of all these threads, ever gotten a definition of what "health care" is?

If some idiot goes and sticks a wine bottle up his ass, does the removal of said bottle count as health care? Why or why not?

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

Taking care of one's self and wanting to keep it that way makes me a right-wing nut job.

And that is a valid ideology. I have no disagreements with it at all. The problem is that it does not work for everyone (48 million people right now). If we all had the ability to take care of ones self and family, then OBVIOUSLY, there would be no issue with Health care.

But the fact is that people do not.

I have a job, I make a decent wage. I can BARELY afford health insurance.

It is not good enough to say "Get off your ass and go get a job". right now, hundreds of thousands are losing their jobs through no fault of their own - they are not lazy, they are not useless nor incompetent. They are simply in an unfortunate situation. And that affects all of society and eventually will affect you and me,

I believe that health care (at some level) is a fundamental human right. And we will see it happen in this country in my lifetime, whether you agree with me or not.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

If you can afford the MRI, go to the clinic and pay for it. I have in the past, because I was denied by the large corporation that supposedly provides me with HEALTH COVERAGE, but does everything they can to NOT pay for it every time I need something.

WOW! Do you realize that you are saying that we should replace what we have now with what we have now only the government will be in charge and we all will be taxed more and face trillions of additional debt.

Splendid. Insurance company denies = bad. Govt denies = good.

I'm floored.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

Again, you think Social Security is working out?

Also, if you had the choice of have cancer treatments in the US or Canada.... Which would you choose?

I also take offense that you think that anyone that thinks an individual should try to take care of themselves is a "nut job"..... I think the world would be MUCH better off if people tried to handle their own issues instead of expecting others to fix their problems.

Is social security working 'perfectly' no. of course not. Is it working? Yes. Is the military working perfectly? absolutely not. Is it working? yes it is.

I would take cancer treatment in Canada as it would not cost me anything at all. Here in the USA, it might very well bankrupt me, even though I have insurance. I would have deductibles, and co-pays and an eventual 'cap' on the amount I would have to spend on my treatment.

While I am sick, I would probably not work, so I would have no money to pay for the deductibles and other fees not covered. I would be deluged in paperwork by the insurance company, mostly denials to the claims that i am making and I would probably be too sick to manage all that properly, causing me not only damage to my credit report for unpaid bills, but costing me lots of money because i do not understand everything that the insurance company is sending me.

When I broke my neck in 2001, it only took one month to build a paper file more than 2 inches thick with denials, letters and insurance gibberish that all had to be handled. the overhead was immense. My credit report was trashed and up to 3 years ago, I was still finding things that fell through the cracks that I had to end up paying for.

I cannot afford a 'manager' to handle all that - most people cannot. Most people cannot afford the type of private insurance that would allow you to get ANY TREATMENT AT ANY COST with NO PAPERWORK to worry about.

Insurance companies are not actually about delivering health care - they are about making money. A government run plan would not be about making money - wit would be about delivering health care.

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

WOW! Do you realize that you are saying that we should replace what we have now with what we have now only the government will be in charge and we all will be taxed more and face trillions of additional debt.

Splendid. Insurance company denies = bad. Govt denies = good.

I'm floored.

try not to twist what I said - the original question was about WAITING 6 months for an MRI, not being DENIED for one.

So yes, if the INSURANCE COMPANY denies the MRI, (happened to me), *OR* the government makes you WAIT 6 months to get one (the current case in Canada), then the option to go pay for it yourself should be allowed.

This is one of the problems with the Canadian system. The government does not allow private companies to do that sort of thing, but I also think that will change in Canada as well, people are willing to pay for Xrays, bloodwork, MRI's etc. - at least some of them, but under the current system, they cannot and do not have that option.

THe Canadian system is far from perfect - but it is better than the system that we have here.

Trillions in National Debt? How so? Canada spends less per capita on health care than the USA. So do all the other 'civilized nationalized health providing countries' out there.

You cannot accumulate more debt by spending less money than you were before. Not sure where you got your math degree - but it seems pretty freaking simple to me.

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

Have we, out of all these threads, ever gotten a definition of what "health care" is?

If some idiot goes and sticks a wine bottle up his ass, does the removal of said bottle count as health care? Why or why not?

If some idiot goes out and jumps out of an airplane and gets hurt - do they get health care?

Your insurance company is already ON A DAILY BASIS, trying to figure out ways to not pay for the insurance that you need or thought you had been paying for.

At least a nationalized system does not really care. Maybe they would have mental health services to figure out why that guy stuck wine bottle up his ass in the first place.

Instead of perhaps sending him to prison as a felon, where he will get lots of other things stuck up his ass on the taxpayers dime......

does the guy with the wine bottle up his ass get social security when he turns 65?