IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

Medicare is, of course, the government. But there could be an a federally chartered NGO. It could be one large coop.

Right. Something like Fannie mae & Freddie Mac - a place for government cronies to get high paying jobs, and providing lots of opportunity for party contributions and the perpetuation of organized constituency groups.

Some "public benefit".

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

ACORN empowers and helps the poor in precisely the same way that the Bolshevic Marxists of the Soviet revolution empowered and helped "the masses", whose champion they purported to be. History has revealed the only folks they "empowered and helped:" were themselves.

Same goes with ACORN - it empowers and helps only itself and those who pull its strings.

Cyclo's understanding of history is a bit deficient.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

ACORN empowers and helps the poor in precisely the same way that the Bolshevic Marxists of the Soviet revolution empowered and helped "the masses", whose champion they purported to be. History has revealed the only folks they "empowered and helped:" were themselves.

Same goes with ACORN - it empowers and helps only itself and those who pull its strings.

Cyclo's understanding of history is a bit deficient.

At least I don't spend all my time arguing from assertion and refusing to provide a single iota of evidence to back up any of the ideas I throw around.

I'm still waiting for you to provide a link, to where Obama has promised to lower medicare payout rates as a cost-saving device. Can you do so, or are you going to admit that you made that up?

I honestly doubt you know anything about ACORN or what they do, at all. You certainly haven't displayed any of that knowledge.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

The whitehouse snitch site has solicited emails to identify and provide information on people that are communicating opposition to their health plan, claiming it is disinformation. This activity may in fact be against the law. I need to read some more about that possibility.

Of course opponents claim, and I believe rightly so, that much of what they are saying is accurate, certainly more accurate than what the administration is putting out on their plan. The administration is the main entity engaged in disinformation. You have already admitted Obama has lied to you. Obama lies on a regular basis, he misinforms, and mischaracterizes what his proposed plan will do.

If you want some good information, forget whitehouse.gov and go to the Heritage Foundation website.

Okie: You're a f'ing LIAR. I have been the recipient of many mass emails containing outrageous lies about healthcare reforms and the alleged contents of HR3200. These emails do not contain one grain of truth. They are designed to misinform and frighten. You don't have a right to spread lies and then throw a tantrum because your lies are being debunked.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

okie wrote:

On Rush Limbaugh today, a very nice woman called in and reported on a Belgrade, Montana town hall with Obama. Attendees, many not political activists, many first time various citizens turning out to ask questions or hold up signs saying I don't want Obama care, etc., they were inflitrated by in your face Obama minions, probably ACORN. And Pelosi has the gall, the nerve, to call honest hard working Americans at town halls Nazis. Baloney, and that is why Americans are mad and getting madder at Obama and his leftist operatives.

Wait; I thought 'in your face' activism was what you guys promoted?

After all, if you support people going out to town halls and making their opinions known, you don't support the other side doing the same thing?

Cycloptichorn

Okie asserts the unfettered right to lie about healthcare reform and anyone who exposes the lies must be stopped! Okie is not a proponent of democracy and informed discussion, he's a proponent ruthless dictatorship at the hands of right-wing extremists.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

ACORN empowers and helps the poor in precisely the same way that the Bolshevic Marxists of the Soviet revolution empowered and helped "the masses", whose champion they purported to be. History has revealed the only folks they "empowered and helped:" were themselves.

Same goes with ACORN - it empowers and helps only itself and those who pull its strings.

Cyclo's understanding of history is a bit deficient.

Amen, George, right on. All despots and maniacs claim to help the masses, the poor, they all claim to want social justice for the downtrodden, blah blah blah. Its so transparent, and so are demagogues like Obama.

1 Reply

@Debra Law,

Bull. Obama lies about it constantly, such as preventive care will save tons of money, which is a myth. He speaks myths all the time, such as if you like your plan, you can keep it, yeah great, thats like if you like UPS or FedEx, keep using them, but I will make it unlawful for UPS or FedEx to do anything to stay in business, such as take on new customers or whatever. They guy is a joke.

3 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

Amen, George, right on. All despots and maniacs claim to help the masses, the poor, they all claim to want social justice for the downtrodden, blah blah blah. Its so transparent, and so are demagogues like Obama.

The right-wing extremists are the witless minions of the morally corrupt GOP and big business. You're a member of the brainless brigade that carries their water so they can reap windfall profits and wield political power. You're a brainwashed fool.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie wrote:

Bull. Obama lies about it constantly, such as preventive care will save tons of money, which is a myth. He speaks myths all the time, such as if you like your plan, you can keep it, yeah great, thats like if you like UPS or FedEx, keep using them, but I will make it unlawful for UPS or FedEx to do anything to stay in business, such as take on new customers or whatever. They guy is a joke.

You don't think preventative care saves money?

What do you think costs more - catching cancer early, or paying for lots of cancer treatments?

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Debra Law,

Couldn't have said it any better; we continue to see these not-so-rich conservatives advocating for more tax cuts for the wealthy as our federal deficit increases to new highs without thinking how that will affect everybody including them and our future generations. They are brainless automatons who have learned the conservative meme without having given it any intellectual exercise about what they are doing.

When told that Obama's health plan will have death panels, they ate it up and repeated it like robots without any brain. They don't even realize that the end of life care planning was recommended by a conservative congressman that would have given patients the opportunity to get information from their doctors on living trusts and living wills that ended up being called "death panels."

There's no cure for stupid.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie wrote:

Bull. Obama lies about it constantly, such as preventive care will save tons of money, which is a myth.

What is your problem, Okie? You don't want people to have their illnesses or diseases diagnosed early so they may be healed or cured? Are you saying colonoscopies and mammograms and other diagnostic tools are too expensive to be used on anyone other than the wealthy and powerful? Are you saying it's cheaper to deprive people of basic healthcare and simply let them die?

You prove over and over again that right-wing extremists are lying hypocrites. At the same time you're warning people to be wary of ruthless dictatorships, you're busy being a ruthless dictator.

3 Replies

@georgeob1,

George, mi dear,

They won the election. Hadn't you heard? Are you objecting to the winner's cronies getting high paying jobs, and providing lots of opportunity for party contributions and the perpetuation of organized constituency groups. I didn't hear much of that from you up until recently. And it isn't only that they are the winners. It is also that your lot are the losers and who cares who is second in the good old USA. Here as well.

Why be a crony otherwise? What are the advantages of being a crony if you delete what you said they get? That you had the privilege of sacrificing your time, money and patience in the service of the nation!!!!? The lines on your face, the dyspepsia, the tantrums, the travel, the chicken etc etc. Who can be that naive?

Obama cronies bad, Bush cronies good! Is that it?

It's the only way we know how to do things. Can you suggest an alternative?

It is their reward for getting the confidence of the public. It's standard practice. Always has been. Won the confidence of the public I should say. Which your lot lost, and as incumbents, which is like losing with 10 yards start in a 30 yard sack race.

The only problem is that the leader can't stick a three-line whip on the cronies and if they don't step up at the vote/s can have them expelled from the party and made to stand as Independents at the next election and, independence being what it is, going down to an official candidate and being out of the door to where cronyism rings the bell.

So you can't do UHC in my view. A 2/3 majority is probably required I should think.

I'm surprised, mildly, that you haven't referred to my post earlier. I placed the Joycean reference for your personal appreciation. If he agreed with Gamby Vico and a few others that everything is going around in pointless circles, civilisations coming and going for want of leadership, extraordinary vanities followed by the humiliating degredation of another lengthy matriarchy then the idea of the money following the same inexorable laws is hardly that difficult to grasp for a fan of his.

It is the system of government which has created the money. Private enterprise outfits are a creation of the government. They can be abolished, taken over and told what to do. And it doesn't want pictures being flashed around the world of life in the USA for the dirt poor. And you don't put your hands over the cameras or hustle them away as they do in some places.

It's bad PR. It's embarrassing. It's being phased out.

0 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

Bull. Obama lies about it constantly, such as preventive care will save tons of money, which is a myth.

What's your proof for that?

And if it really is a myth - why does it work very well elsewhere? Why can we (= our system) save tons of money? Why do our "stupid" private companies give lower fees for those who attend preventive courses, go to preventive specialists etc?

0 Replies

@Debra Law,

"Preventative care" is the name for the global excercise of health care that has not been proven to be cost effective. Studies have been done that shows there aren't definitive cost savings realized for all the testings done by doctors to prevent many of the serious illnesses that can usually be caught in time to save the patient.

We also know by the unhealthy practices of most Americans when it comes to overweight issues, and especially our children. We are more health food conscious, but even that has cost/benefit issues.

My best friend who was diabetic loved to eat, and no matter how much his wife and children argued with him about his eating habits was for naught. He eventually killed himself for the love of good food/eating what he shouldn't have. I believe healthy practices begins with the individual, and "prevention practices" are secondary. Doctors can't keep doing tests for all patients to see if they have medical problems that are often missed by these tests. Americans still love their summer bbqs.

I would like to add one more comment about preventive care and health insurance. It would seem to me, at least, that health insurance premiums should be rated on healthy habits as well as age. Someone who is overweight should be charged more in premiums as well as those who smoke. I think that makes it more attractive for people to keep healthy habits.

0 Replies

@Debra Law,

Debra Law wrote:

okie wrote:

Bull. Obama lies about it constantly, such as preventive care will save tons of money, which is a myth.

What is your problem, Okie? You don't want people to have their illnesses or diseases diagnosed early so they may be healed or cured? Are you saying colonoscopies and mammograms and other diagnostic tools are too expensive to be used on anyone other than the wealthy and powerful? Are you saying it's cheaper to deprive people of basic healthcare and simply let them die?

You prove over and over again that right-wing extremists are lying hypocrites. At the same time you're warning people to be wary of ruthless dictatorships, you're busy being a ruthless dictator.

I don't think he made any value judgement at all. It was you who did that.

He did point out some observable facts that relate directly to some false assertions that our president has made. Namely that improved preventative medicine will likely significantly lower the total cost of health care. The truth is that improved preventative care is certainly a social good in that it will (on average) extend the lives of many people. However, it will also increase the number of people who die at a more advanced age from one of the many degenerative dfiseases that result - and they cost much more to treat. Obama could have argued that better prevention will extend the economically productive lives of people, and thereby ultimately save money. However he didn't do that.

Debra hyperventillates easily.

0 Replies

@Debra Law,

Quote:

You don't want people to have their illnesses or diseases diagnosed early so they may be healed or cured?

That's not preventive care Debs. Preventive care is stopping diseases happening. A never ending task. You can't heal or cure something that didn't happen.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

You don't think preventative care saves money?

What do you think costs more - catching cancer early, or paying for lots of cancer treatments?

Cycloptichorn

Sure, but it doesn't have to involve dozens of tests, all it takes is common sense, like exercise, don't smoke, don't go on a drunk every week, don't over eat, and don't fry yourself in the sun, things like that. Each person is their own best judge of prevention, if they have any sense. There are other things that can be done, and early detection is helpful, but if preventive care means across the board testing done on every person as a matter of practice, it is not cost effective in my opinion and I think the facts support that. My mother is 97, and hardly ever went to the doctor, but she took care of herself, and lived sensibly. Her brother lived past 100, another to 89, they all lived sensibly. My dad lived past 90. Look, I understand that living sensibly does not guarantee everything, but I can sit at Walmart and watch the people file in and out and tell that 1/3 to half are over weight, sorry, but I think they are responsible for that, not the government.

The point you are missing is that testing 10 people all the time costs more money than what you save when you catch maybe one of 10's cancer early. And catching it early does not guarantee a less expensive fight, maybe, but maybe not. And I have seen cases of too much doctoring, where even tests caused medical problems that would not have occurred otherwise.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

You don't think preventative care saves money?

What do you think costs more - catching cancer early, or paying for lots of cancer treatments?

Cycloptichorn

Sure, but it doesn't have to involve dozens of tests, all it takes is common sense, like exercise, don't smoke, don't go on a drunk every week, don't over eat, and don't fry yourself in the sun, things like that. Each person is their own best judge of prevention, if they have any sense. There are other things that can be done, and early detection is helpful, but if preventive care means across the board testing done on every person as a matter of practice, it is not cost effective in my opinion and I think the facts support that. My mother is 97, and hardly ever went to the doctor, but she took care of herself, and lived sensibly. Her brother lived past 100, another to 89, they all lived sensibly. My dad lived past 90. Look, I understand that living sensibly does not guarantee everything, but I can sit at Walmart and watch the people file in and out and tell that 1/3 to half are over weight, sorry, but I think they are responsible for that, not the government.

I agree, but that's not what preventative care really means; that is to say, it doesn't mean 'running every test possible.' It does mean working with your doctor to do SOME early screening, and a lot of making sure you are following the right sort of lifestyle.

George is correct, if a bit cold-hearted, when he states that preventative care actually allows people to live MUCH longer on average, which can cost more in the end, maybe. Heaven forbid we work to extend lifetimes in this country! Why, we all might have to pay a few more dollars in taxes to achieve this useless result...

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

You seem to be confusing prevention with diagnostics.

2 Replies

@roger,

roger wrote:

You seem to be confusing prevention with diagnostics.

Diagnostics are a part of preventative care. You have to know that you have a predilection for diabetes before you can target specific treatments and lifestyle choices to prevent it.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know