65
   

IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

 
 
High Seas
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2009 12:27 pm
@FreeDuck,
Free Duck - I already answered your question two pages ago. Here is a link:
http://able2know.org/topic/89938-190#post-3737977

All costs can be classified as either direct (operating) or overhead (indirect) except for original investment, which is a capital cost, and may be either expensed or amortized. Then there are financial costs, interest, principal repayment, taxes. I realize that at the sandlot level in which you operate these are difficult concepts but if you really try to understand them I'm sure you can do it. You might also consult an introductory accounting textbook. Finally please don't bother me with your halfbaked psychobabble - I'm just profoundly uninterested in it.

FreeDuck
 
  4  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2009 12:32 pm
@High Seas,
Oh, right. Now I see it. How could I have missed that blindingly eloquent explanation? I cower in my ignorance.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2009 12:35 pm
@High Seas,
but, but, but....we were responding to your statement
Quote:
If you're going to do that, 3% overhead is too high, overhead should be zero - you can get a machine to do it automatically. The sheer dishonesty in this debate is staggering.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2009 12:47 pm
@High Seas,
I'm still waiting for a substantiation for the assertion that Medicare pays 'any and all bills it receives, without review.' Pretty bold claim for you to make, should be exceedingly easy for you to back it up.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2009 04:20 pm
And the arm twisting begins

Quote:

Nancy Pelosi: No Way Health Care Bill Passes House Without A Public Option
Brian Beutler | August 20, 2009, 5:51PM

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi knows how to twist arms, and some on the left worry that she might twist liberal arms to pass a health care bill without a public option. But apparently that's beyond her power.

"There is no way I can pass a bill in the House of Representatives without a public option,
" she said to a crowd in California, noting that regional health care co-ops won't get the job done. "If they want to have [co-ops] for their state, perhaps that could be included in the legislation. But it is not a substitute for a public option."

The House Energy and Commerce Committee has agreed to a provision that would allow states to erect co-ops in addition to the public option. But a large progressive bloc insists that the overall bill must contain a public option or it won't pass.

Pelosi appears to be putting the White House and Senate on notice--there must be a public option, or there won't be health care reform for a very long time. "Let me just be very clear," she said. "If we don't pass this bill with all the comprehensive aspects of it now, I don't know when we'll have a chance to do it."


http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/nancy-pelosi-no-way-health-care-bill-passes-house-without-a-public-option.php?ref=fpa

I predict that Obama will sign a bill including a public option, this Fall.

Cycloptichorn
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2009 04:38 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
The poll: 55% expect the overhaul will give coverage to illegal immigrants; 34% don't. The facts: The proposals now being negotiated do not provide coverage for illegal immigrants.


The bill I am reading does NOT exclude illegal immigrants from being covered.
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2009 04:41 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
Did you ever say one word about Bush and Cheney extensively using Halliburton, even as Cheney owned millions of dollars in their stock? Once?


It wasnt needed.

Both the President AND the VP and their immediate families are required to place any stock they might own into a blind trust.
They have no control over how it it managed, nor are they allowed to ask.
All they are told is if their stocks made a profit for the year or not, for tax purposes.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2009 04:43 pm
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

Quote:
The poll: 55% expect the overhaul will give coverage to illegal immigrants; 34% don't. The facts: The proposals now being negotiated do not provide coverage for illegal immigrants.


The bill I am reading does NOT exclude illegal immigrants from being covered.


Unless the bill specifically states that illegal immigrants WILL be covered, it can be assumed that they will not; as we typically don't write laws which affect non-citizens without specifically stating that they do so.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2009 04:44 pm
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

Quote:
Did you ever say one word about Bush and Cheney extensively using Halliburton, even as Cheney owned millions of dollars in their stock? Once?


It wasnt needed.

Both the President AND the VP and their immediate families are required to place any stock they might own into a blind trust.
They have no control over how it it managed, nor are they allowed to ask.
All they are told is if their stocks made a profit for the year or not, for tax purposes.


Aw, man, don't tell me you believe that ****. Honestly.

Plus, it doesn't matter if it's in a 'blind trust,' even a blind man knows that giving hundreds of billions of dollars in no-bid contracts to a company which you own plenty of stock in isn't going to hurt that stock...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 07:04 am
Quote:
More than three out of every four Americans feel it is important to have a "choice" between a government-run health care insurance option and private coverage, according to a public opinion poll released on Thursday.

A new study by SurveyUSA puts support for a public option at a robust 77 percent, one percentage point higher than where it stood in June.

But the numbers tell another story, as well.

Earlier in the week, after pollsters for NBC dropped the word "choice" from their question on a public option, they found that only 43 percent of the public were in favor of "creating a public health care plan administered by the federal government that would compete directly with private health insurance companies."

Opponents of the president's agenda jumped on the findings as evidence that backing for the public option was dropping. Proponents responded by arguing that NBC's tinkering with the language of the question (which it had also done in its July survey) had contributed to the drop in favorability for a public plan.

SurveyUSA's poll, which was commissioned by the progressive group MoveOn.org, a proponent of the public plan, gives credence to those critiques. While arguments about what type of language best describe the public option persist --"choice" is considered a trigger word that everyone naturally supports -- it seems clear that the framing of the provision goes a long way toward determining its popularity.

In asking its question SurveyUSA used the same exact words that NBC/Wall Street Journal had used when conducting its June 2009 survey. That one that found 76 percent approval for the public option: "In any health care proposal, how important do you feel it is to give people a choice of both a public plan administered by the federal government and a private plan for their health insurance--extremely important, quite important, not that important, or not at all important?"

To ensure that its respondent pool was composed of people from similar demographics and political mindsets, SurveyUSA asked respondents a question pulled directly from NBC's August survey. The results were nearly identical.

Read a description of the president's health care plan, 51 percent of Survey USA respondents said they "favored" the approach, while 43 percent opposed it. In the NBC poll, 53 percent of respondents said they favored the president's plan, 43 percent said they opposed it.


Links at the source

0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 10:21 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:


I predict that Obama will sign a bill including a public option, this Fall.

Cycloptichorn


I want to memorialize this prediction for future reference. Credulity in the face of contrary facts is a hallmark of the true believer .... or fanatic, depending on your point of view.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 10:25 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:


I predict that Obama will sign a bill including a public option, this Fall.

Cycloptichorn


I want to memorialize this prediction for future reference. Credulity in the face of contrary facts is a hallmark of the true believer .... or fanatic, depending on your point of view.


Well, the truth is that the Dems have the votes to pass the bill, if they decide they want to. This provides us with an underlying situation in which the elements necessary for my prediction to come true are right in line. As to whether or not it will happen, I don't know; but if I had to guess, I would guess that it would.

Cycloptichorn
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 10:38 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Equivocating already ?? The truth is that, given the growing disaffection of the so-called "red dog" Democrats and the likely altered views of the Congress when it reconvenes, they probably don't have the votes. We may well be seeing a reenactment of the events of 1993-4. It appears likely that the "progressive left" has, once again, overplayed its hand.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 10:40 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

Equivocating already ?? The truth is that, given the growing disaffection of the so-called "red dog" Democrats and the likely altered views of the Congress when it reconvenes, they probably don't have the votes. We may well be seeing a reenactment of the events of 1993-4. It appears likely that the "progressive left" has, once again, overplayed its hand.


Oh, I don't know about that. The Dems can pass a bill in the house with a public option, no problem. If they can split the bill in the Senate, we'll ram it down your throats, no matter what Max Baucus has to say about it.

It isn't as if the Dems don't know the stakes here - if they get this passed, you guys are fucked, and you know it. When push comes to shove, I believe they will pass the bills; and I stand by my original prediction.

Why do you think the views of Congress will be 'altered' when they return? Because you guys rounded up a bunch of rednecks to go yell at them during town halls? Please!

Cycloptichorn
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 10:51 am
@Cycloptichorn,
The first law of Holes is .... "when you are in one, stop digging."
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 10:57 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

The first law of Holes is .... "when you are in one, stop digging."


So, if the Dems do pass a bill with a public option, you're going to come back with a long explanation as to how wrong you were? You are putting yourself pretty out there here, with your absolute certainty that no bill will be passed at all.

Cycloptichorn
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 11:06 am
@Cycloptichorn,
I didn't say that. Instead I merely noted the unrealism of your very firm and unambiguous prediction that the president will sign a Health care bill containing a Public option by the Fall.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 11:09 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

I didn't say that. Instead I merely noted the unrealism of your very firm and unambiguous prediction that the president will sign a Health care bill containing a Public option by the Fall.


Unrealistic b/c... ? Because you feel the Dems don't have the votes to do it? They clearly have the numbers to do so if they wish, especially if they use budget reconciliation to do so - something both Obama and Reid have threatened to do. I think you are allowing your judgment to be swayed by your hopes here, George.

Cycloptichorn
georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 11:15 am
@Cycloptichorn,
You are the one making specific predictions here, not me. The equivocations, however, are noted.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 11:22 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

You are the one making specific predictions here, not me. The equivocations, however, are noted.


What equivocations? I have said over and over again, and I say again now: I stand by my prediction that Obama will sign a bill with the Public option in it this Fall.

You are not specifically predicting that he will not? The tone of your posts would seem to indicate that this is what you believe.

Cycloptichorn
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 09/20/2024 at 08:53:04