Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Boo, do you really think it was better to pass a bill that fails to get to a single payor system. Now that we have a law they will not want to revisit this for another generation. If the dems were willing to give up their majority for this issue, shouldn't they have gone all the way and pass a real health care reform bill?
So how many jobs has Obama created lately?
:fueltofir
So how many jobs has Obama created lately?
:fueltofir
To get rid of Obama care and just reform healthcare without a huge government take over.
not as many as bush lost, unfortunately
Is it? So, how do you get preexisting conditions covered (something poll say people want), cover more children (again a popular part of the bill), and have not only more but most people covered (again, something the people have said they wanted)? Exactly what will those elected do to get these things but not have a public option or a mandate?
Let's see, how does anyone that supports Obamacare justify 111 waivers granted to contituent groups such as SEIU, etc. What do these organizations and entitities know that Boo and others don't?
Is it? So, how do you get preexisting conditions covered (something poll say people want), cover more children (again a popular part of the bill), and have not only more but most people covered (again, something the people have said they wanted)? Exactly what will those elected do to get these things but not have a public option or a mandate?
I really believe that some move in the right direction is better than no move. Yes. And I suspect it will be revisited sooner. In the mean time, I would hope that we would become more immune to the socialism nonsense and more open to a single payer system. I do believe it would be a better option.
I think that the flaws are so fundemental to a good health care system that this bill actually makes things worse rather than better. Congress/ administration was unwilling to tackle the really hard stuff. A system that is employer based makes for much of the uninsured, rather an some universal system. Then to control cost there really has to be some type of rationing. Obama actually ackowledged this early in the debate when he talked about taking the blue pill versus the pink one. Code for generic versus branded (more expensive drugs). That is how the debate turned falsely to death panels. On something that impacts 15% of our economy we need an adult debate on the real issues, including what the country can afford to provide. Acknowledge that in a capitalist society the rich have the ability to purchase things the poor can't etc.
It is sad the way this debate and legislation turned out.
You pass bill with specifics not a government take over. Healthcare can be goverened with a few laws
While I personally prefer a universal payer system, we simply can't have that passed yet. When even a public option get's demonized as socialism, there is no chance of discussing a universal payer. The objection is just too pervasive, and the socialism scare tactic still holds too much sway. And I agree this was a sad way to debate this topic, and warned of it long before it happened. Too many know that the dishonest works. So, we can't seem to have an adult conversation. Sadly.
Still, I believe one step is better than none.
While I personally prefer a universal payer system, we simply can't have that passed yet. When even a public option get's demonized as socialism, there is no chance of discussing a universal payer. The objection is just too pervasive, and the socialism scare tactic still holds too much sway. And I agree this was a sad way to debate this topic, and warned of it long before it happened. Too many know that the dishonest works. So, we can't seem to have an adult conversation. Sadly.
Still, I believe one step is better than none.
this is where Obama blew itMaybe during Obamas second term we can get Medicare for all passed. Of course we will have to get rid of the tea bag seat warmers first.
this is where Obama blew it
he had both house of congress under his control, while teddy was still living
he should have pushed thru an expansion of medicare for all
he wasted his mandate, confusing the public and substantially watering down the bill in an attempt to reach a consensus with the party of 'no'
as we see, the republicans had no intent to work with him and ran out the shot clock until he lost control of the senate ... and now the house
he's a great statesman. less so a politician
this is where Obama blew it
he had both house of congress under his control, while teddy was still living
he should have pushed thru an expansion of medicare for all
he wasted his mandate, confusing the public and substantially watering down the bill in an attempt to reach a consensus with the party of 'no'
as we see, the republicans had no intent to work with him and ran out the shot clock until he lost control of the senate ... and now the house
he's a great statesman. less so a politician
QUOTE Conservative
Is this how you operate in real life, you take a broken, bloated program that costs more than intended and is filled with fraud and waste so you expand it?
There was no government take over. Read my statements above.
Yet Medicare and the VA get more bang for the buck than private insurance. Amazing isn’t it?
2000 plus pages show it is
actually it isIs this how you operate in real life,
i diagnose the problem - the need for healthcare for all - and reach out for the most reasonable and efficient solutionyou take a broken, bloated program that costs more than intended and is filled with fraud and waste so you expand it?
the thing i find most clueless about that comment is why anyone equates the operation of a nationwide system covering all citizens' healthcare needs with the operation of a for profit businessDoubt that anyone promoting single payer has ever run a business thus doesn't really have a clue.
Kinda looks like Carvel was right when he said Hillary should have lent Obama one of her balls eh? :mrgreen:
Medicare today costs almost 500 billion a year so continue to dodge that fact, which is hardly the biggest bang for the buck.
actually it is
i diagnose the problem - the need for healthcare for all - and reach out for the most reasonable and efficient solution
medicare and medicaid are not without problems, but when the entire nation is exposed to the aspects of the federal program which need to be changed, then there is more pressure on our representatives to effect those needed changes
the thing i find most clueless about that comment is why anyone equates the operation of a nationwide system covering all citizens' healthcare needs with the operation of a for profit business
There is no way you can dodge the fact that Medicare’s costs per beneficiary is 8.8% — but insurance premiums have risen at an annual rate of 9.9%.EVEN WITH ALL OF THE FRAUD.
These numbers were 2009 numbers; before the insurance companies had an excuse to raise there rates even more.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?