65
   

IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Oct, 2009 02:15 pm
@roger,
CI wrote:
Yes, we belong to Medicare Advantage. My experience under Medicare Advantage has been very acceptable including our co-pays. What's your experience?


roger wrote:

You may say the Medicare Advantage is no better than regular Medicare. You are a long way from showing it. If you are in Medicare Advantage, you have coverage. If you are in Medicare B, you are probably still looking for a doctor that accepts. There aren't very many who do. If you don't understand why, you're not really competent to comment on either.


Medicare advantage is, I'm sure, preferable to the regular program for those who are enrolled in it; and why wouldn't it be? It is a heavily subsidized program which is basically a handout to insurers. It adds gigantic profits to the insurance companies' bottom lines.

I understand that a lot of you who are on Medicare advantage aren't looking forward to losing this, but hey. Times are tough and we can't afford to keep subsidizing insurance companies any longer.

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Oct, 2009 04:34 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
The government should have corrected this problem when it was first identified. They are incompetent on most things they happen to get their hands on.

This can be corrected without UHC.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Oct, 2009 05:17 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

The government should have corrected this problem when it was first identified. They are incompetent on most things they happen to get their hands on.

This can be corrected without UHC.


Sure, but this isn't the only thing which is trying to be corrected.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Oct, 2009 10:59 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

The government should have corrected this problem when it was first identified. They are incompetent on most things they happen to get their hands on.

This can be corrected without UHC.


How can it be reasonably corrected? Congress is not going to reduce the gigantic overhead of the private insurers.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Oct, 2009 11:27 am
@Advocate,
That's what I'm afraid of; congress talks about "savings," but lack the will to do anything about what they identify as waste. Worthless!
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Oct, 2009 01:10 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

That's what I'm afraid of; congress talks about "savings," but lack the will to do anything about what they identify as waste. Worthless!


I guess you are a right-winger after all.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Oct, 2009 01:28 pm
@Advocate,
I'm not a "right-winger." I'm an independent who condemns waste whether it's done by democrats or republicans.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Oct, 2009 02:12 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Well, what you are subsidizing in medical treatment, but I can understand your resentment. There used to be sort of an implicit compact. You pay into Medicare all your life, and by doing so, you are subsidizing medical care for the elderly. The other side of the compact was that there would be someone to carry the freight for you. There is no such certainty now, is there? Everyone will be forking it over for their own mandatory insurance. Why should you also be required to pay Medicare for someone else's coverage? I have the feeling the compact is about to be broken.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Oct, 2009 04:29 pm
@roger,
There's no longer a certainty, because the feds have failed to act on both premium increases and longevity. This information has been known for several decades, and as our economy started to tank in December 2007, FICA tax revenues started to drop, and they still did nothing. They have during that same time increased their own benefits. They're a bunch of crooks just looking out for themselves.

It's our fault for voting them into office.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Nov, 2009 08:03 pm
One of the wedges or arguments carried forward by liberal Democrats in their push for greater government power and influence over the health care industry is that of so-called compassion. Interesting that they have the nerve to use the argument of compassion when they advance none for the weakest and most vulnerable among us, the unborn. It is with the above in mind that I found the following article of interest. Apparently, Abby Johnson, a former director of a Planned Parenthood finally had a change of heart and joined a pro-life group. What turned her around? Apparently one big factor was witnessing an unborn crumple as it was vacuumed out of its mothers womb, and also realizing it was about the money as they pressured to do more abortions for more money.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,571215,00.html

"The former director of a Planned Parenthood clinic in southeast Texas says she had a "change of heart" after watching an abortion last month " and she quit her job and joined a pro-life group in praying outside the facility.

Abby Johnson, 29, used to escort women from their cars to the clinic in the eight years she volunteered and worked for Planned Parenthood in Bryan, Texas. But she says she knew it was time to leave after she watched a fetus "crumple" as it was vacuumed out of a patient's uterus in September.

'When I was working at Planned Parenthood I was extremely pro-choice," Johnson told FoxNews.com. But after seeing the internal workings of the procedure for the first time on an ultrasound monitor, "I would say there was a definite conversion in my heart ... a spiritual conversion."

Johnson said she became disillusioned with her job after her bosses pressured her for months to increase profits by performing more and more abortions, which cost patients between $505 and $695.

"Every meeting that we had was, 'We don't have enough money, we don't have enough money " we've got to keep these abortions coming,'" Johnson told FoxNews.com. "It's a very lucrative business and that's why they want to increase numbers."
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Nov, 2009 08:15 pm
@okie,
Another extremist recruited; now she wants to control other women's lives. From walking pregnant women from their cars to the clinics, now she's going to impose her self-found religion of prolife onto other women, and don't give a hoot for their private lives.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Nov, 2009 10:59 pm
Confirmation of my belief that AARP is nothing more than a liberal leaning partisan Democrat organization. They have no business endorsing anything. They should be non-partisan. They claim to represent seniors, not represent some political party or philosophy. I do not, nor will I ever belong to what has become a very pathetic organization.

"House Health Care Bill to Get AARP Endorsement, Sources Say"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/04/house-health-care-aarp-endorsement-sources-say/

P.S. I wonder how much money Obama promised them?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Nov, 2009 11:50 pm
@okie,
okie, You are an idiot; AARP represents seniors - all those over age 50. They advocate for seniors in this country, and provide other essential services.

What's your problem? Do you speak for all the republicans/conservatives who are members of AARP?

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 11:29 am
@cicerone imposter,
Here's another issue not addressed before, but I believe has import; small businesses are not hiring now for fear that they will be required to provide health insurance to their employees at much higher cost. If you're a small business owner, would you hire more workers not knowing how your business will be impacted by the government's mandate to provide health insurance?

Please raise your hand.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 12:00 pm
@okie,
Saying AARP is partisan is like saying Consumers Union is partisan because it picks one product over another. AARP weighed all the issues involving health care and came down in favor of a public option.

It is truly unbelievable the depths to which the Republican party is willing to sink for purposes of partisan politics. It is of no concern to the party that 50 million are uninsured, that another 40 million are underinsured, and that 47,000 die each year due to lack of coverage. The Republican Party is the biggest enemy of the USA.

The party is outraged that AQ killed 3,000 Americans, but has no problem with 47,000 dying each year because they have no insurance. Should Republicans win on HC, they will have a lot of blood on their hands.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 12:51 pm
@Advocate,
Well stated; but it shows why the republican party has become so dangerous to our country with so many believing in their message to destroy it. They love wars over taking care of our own. They can't see terrorism exported to other countries where we kill thousands of innocent people while fighting with their last breath to prevent life saving policies for our own country's people.

They talk a good game about "each life is precious," but fail the laugher test when it comes to the reality of their advocacy and actions. They just want to control other people's lives.

They don't even care how our tax monies are spent - just as long as it doesn't provide for our own people.
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 01:33 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Well said! The Republican party is horrible, but it seems so much worse than ever before. I guess it feels that it must do anything possible, no matter how rotten and against the best interests of the country, to keep the Dems from gaining too much because of Rep failures during the Bush administration.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 02:58 pm
@Advocate,
What's so amazing about their destructive behavior is that it will surely impact them, their families, and their friends.

I've always known about religious' fanatics, but this is equivalent or worse.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 03:03 pm
@Advocate,
Quote:

Well said! The Republican party is horrible, but it seems so much worse than ever before. I guess it feels that it must do anything possible, no matter how rotten and against the best interests of the country, to keep the Dems from gaining too much because of Rep failures during the Bush administration


if the republicans were so horrible and out of touch then they would be run over by the majority, and pushed out of power. The party exists only through public support, there is a huge chunk of America who believes what the party stands for. You and your crew need to account for the fact that not everyone thinks as you do, and that other people's views and opinions count as much as yours do, even though you are sure that you are right and that they are stupid.
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 03:15 pm
@hawkeye10,
BS! The Republicans are like the Nazis in constantly repeating the big lie, getting the deluded and the ignorant to join their cause. For instance, the disruptions during the town hall meetings were carefully orchestrated by these latter-day Nazis to spread lies and prevent any orderly discussion of the facts.
 

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 0.13 seconds on 11/18/2024 at 04:38:24