Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by apple strudel, Aug 13, 2009.
And so much for rationing:
Whistle-blower: Health care industry engaging in PR tactics - CNN.com
one could say the same thing about obama scare tactics.........if it was all that, it would sell itself
It was only a matter of time before my biggest admirer showed up.
continuing juvenile tactics..........you lack orginality
What are the scare tactics you're referring to? There are many specific scare tactics by the right, such as death panels, taking away your insurance, the government choosing your doctor, fewer Medicare benefits, fewer VA benefits, etc.
Can you post a few examples of Obama's scare tactics so I know what you're referring to?
Please answer me one question. The administration( bill in Congress)talks about saving $500 billion dollars from Medicare. If you're saving money by not spending money that you anticipate spending, how is that not cutting benefits????
House Democrats Say CBO Projects $500 Billion in Gross Savings From Medicare
A quote from Obama:
â€śIf we donâ€™t get health care done now, then no oneâ€™s health insurance is going to be secure. Youâ€™re going to continue to see premiums going up at astronomical rates, out of pocket costs going up at astronomical rates, and people who lose their jobs. . . finding themselves in a situation where they cannot get health care.â€ť"
Sounds like scare tactics to me. Get my plan passed now or else. Sounds like the stimulus bill. "America's economy will never recover unless you pass the Stimulus bill right now". "America is facing the great recession in its history." He is basically putting forth his opinions as facts with nothing to back is up. That's trying to scare people into gettng what you want done without proving what you say.
How can scare tactics be based on the facts of the last few years?
1) Premiums have been going up and continue to do so. Fact.
2) People who lose their jobs do find themselves in the position where they can be refused health insurance. Fact.
In fact, even Lance Armstrong was denied coverage for his cancer treatment because he switched plans and the new one claimed it was a pre-existing condition. He only eventually got it because the CEO of one of his sponsors strong-armed their insurance provider to get Lance on their plan.
At least part of their thinking is as follows: By standardizing paperwork and systems, you'll massively reduce administrative costs; by having more info online (available to doctors with patient's consent), you'll reduce duplicate tests and duplicate efforts; and by providing more preventative care and counseling you'll reduce other costs. Here's a good example of the latter. Many older people want to die at home, but end up dying in hospitals because they are in no position to object. They are put on life support and kept that way sometimes for weeks or longer, at tremendous economic and emotional cost. But, if they were given the opportunity to specify a health care proxy and state their end of life wishes, it would be better for everyone.
do you have any clue as to the administration costs as they are now?
if the government cannot maintain the solvency of something much simpler such as social security, what makes anyone think that the government can create a solvent health care system, and when has the government ever simplified anything? these are all fallacies by the sales people of the plan
That's a fair enough example, except for the fact that there seems to be wide spread consensus that we need to make changes to our health care system. And given the fact that we spend twice as much per capita as any equally good health care system, it's clear we are wasting a lot of money. But, I do agree that Obama's wording is dire, and I don't know the degree to which it's accurate.
The only reason the government has trouble with solvency of these programs is 25 years of Reaganism brought about tax cuts and big spending. We need to raise taxes so that we can pay for things, but the American electorate seems to like the idea of getting something for nothing. I think Obama will raise taxes on the wealthy in order to bring our budget deficit under control.
And, by the way, Medicare and Social Security work extremely well, and are far simpler to deal with than any private insurances, especially from an administrative point of view.
Another useless post.
Simple. We already spend far too much on private healthcare, and the savings will be through reform of this industry (ie elimination of greed and corruption). And that's why it's called "Healthcare Reform".
like all the ones you make?
taxes are already too high........simple fact is that the government will always attempt to spend more than it takes......
BTW, the big spending came at the hand of a liberal house and senate......learn how government works
your reality is 'create whatever spending that I want, and then raise taxes until they are paid for' ....... does not work....period
Very much like the corporate model, our model for our politicians is also very self-defeating. Congressmen look for new money to spend in order to get re-elected. The more you do for your district and/or the nation, the more well known you become.
When will people get honest and realize our gov't ALREADY spends enough? It's just a matter of moving money around, not adding more money or tax revenues.
Cut military spending in half is a good place to start.
This idea brings a smile to my face.
Can you name me another type of 'reform' that has generated savings of this magnitude? While elimination of paperwork sounds good, the introduction of electronic records is by no means guaranteed to save money and in fact may cost more when you factor in privacy concerns such as HIPAA and identity theft protections....
Good luck making that happen.
Separate names with a comma.