joether
Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
First and foremost, I wish this to be clear: HEALTHCARE IS NOT A RIGHT. You, as a human being do have certain, God given (not government given) rights. Example: You have the right to defend yourself, family and possessions against attack. If someone raises their fist towards you or yours, you have the OBLIGATION to grab whatever is handy (fist, object, firearm, etc) and hit them back first. That is a law of the jungle. That subject will be another post.
Everyone has the right to their opinion. Mine is that healthcare is neither a right nor a privilage, but a needed concept. A needed concept that trumps the right AND the privilaged! If you have the right to defend yourself from harm, than please, sir, explain to me how your firearm protects you from cancer? Since disease can strike anyone at any time, by your defination of 'defending myself against attack', I (and everyone else) should be allowed health care. And that the goverment should make every effort to protect us (i.e. like our military). Again, this is using your words to the logical conclusion based on common problems the human body experiences in its life.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
Healthcare is not a right, because you must depend on someone else to provide a service to you. You do not have the right to force someone else to provide that service if they do not want to offer it. In today's world, it takes a maximum effort commitment of 8-10 years and upwards of $100,000 to become a doctor. Just remember, no doctors, no healthcare. The tests and treatments involved in today's healthcare are also very expensive. An MRI machine can easily cost over $2 million, just for the machine. Not to mention the maintenance and repair costs associated with it. I was on a medication for 10 years that retailed for $830 a month. Luckily I had insurance, so I didn't have to pay that price.
Healthcare becomes a right if we vote on it. Recall at one time in the nation's history, Americans ban the sale and transportation of beer. Did Americans have the right to drink beer before? Of course they did; but the Founding Fathers didnt believe it needed to be protected because it fell under the heading 'common sense'. Notice, that law is no longer in effect? Common sense eventually won out over ignorance and foolishness. Samething with healthcare. People in this country (like yourself) are simply foolish to think that your stance and viewpoint is really good for the nation's citizenry in the long term. Now, I as a citizen can speak from a unique position than yourself. I voted to have healthcare for all my fellow Massholes. We set the rules, regulations and laws to benefit the residents of Massachusetts. We were mindful not to take over businesses, but did explain it to such companies that every citizens will be covered by some level of decent coverage. Which is why the general health of the commonwealth is doing much better than most of hte country. We put alot of hard work and time into making something that was good for the state, the people, and the companies within it.
Are you in favor of companies that profit off the suffering and death of others? That *IS* what your advocating.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
Healthcare is expensive simply because we have tests and treatments today that didn't exist 20 years ago. If you developed cancer when I was growing up, it was a death sentence. Sure, they could cut out what they could, but it just grew back and still killed you. Today, you can through modern treatments, beat cancer multiple times.
Defense of the Nation is expensive simply because we have new toys and stuff today that didn't exist 20 years ago. But the challenges our military must overcome in today's world are more sophisicated than when I was growing up. Sure, they (the military) can cut down just about anyone, but terrorists organizations like Al Qaeda can keep coming back.....like a cancer. Today, our military is so ass-kicking, we destroyed the 4th largest military during the GHWB Administration and went back and paid $4 Trillion of borrowed money just to do it again!
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.....notice I just took your material and reformated it in another manner? That's because this paragraphy of yours is B.S. When your at the mercy of the 'For-Profit' healthcare company, its expensive not because of the doctors, nurses, facilities, and equipment. Your paying all those bigshot upper level executives that have fancy offices, perks, and take home pay that easily rivals some third world nations. Metaphorically speaking, your jumping off the cliff and wanting everyone else to do the same; not the other way around. Maybe us Americans dont want to give $0.27 of every dollar to the corporate executives, but instead only give $0.01 and place the other $0.26 towards the patients.....
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
Someone invested millions of dollars into developing these tests and treatments, and they expect to recoup that cost and make a profit as well. That drug I mentioned above? It probably took 10 years and upwards of $50 million (or more) from initial conception, testing, marketing and production to produce and bring to market. Sure, the generic is cheap once the patent expires, because the generic manufacturers didn't have the capital outlay that the inventors did.
This system used to work a few decades ago. Now, its becoming a burden on Americans in ways you obviously couldnt care about. If a drug was found that cured AIDS for example in the USA. How long would it take for someone in another country to simply make a clone of it (much like all the knock-off DVDs of the latest movies)? And they charge 1/10th the amount of the American company? On top of that, they sell the drug in a country that really has no ties with the US Goverment. What happens then? People will travel to that country, get the treatment, come back here and tell everyone about it. And the American company gets....screwed. Which is why the medical community exchanges ideas with each other. Its how scientists work. I know, as a conservative, your totally ignorant of how scientists do things. They even talk in a language you dont understand, even though the words are English, Latin, and sometimes.....Metric! [Shutter]
Recall a few years ago, that millions of Americans would take bus rides from many states to Canada simply to load up on drugs that cost considerably less there than here? Again, why should patients have to pay the cost of the upper level executive's perks? Did they (the upper management) make the discoveries in the lab? Did they spend countless hours studying formulas, testing ideas, and going through thousands if not tens of thousands of failures to develop the drug? NO....they didnt. But they're happy to take credit for it!
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
Healthcare is a big, expensive business. If you take the money out of it, no one will do it, and then where is your precious "right?"
Defense of the nation is a big, expensive business. If you take the money out of it, no one will do it, and then where is your precious 'rights'?
Notice your arguement....sucks? Health care is expensive because Americans have thrown their collective hands up and given full control of things over to the special interests and lobbying groups. And as history shows, Americans are angry at the manner things have come to be, but can not admit to themselves or anyone else, that they did all this to themselves. Rather than beat pavement, rally for better healthcare (not to mention other causes), they gave full power and control to corporations whom dont give a 'rat's ass about you'. All you are to the corporation, is a number. That's it, just a number. Your name, where you live, your age, your accomplishments, your wishs, your religious belief, your thoughts, and desires are irrelavent to the corporation. You are just a number. Once that numbe becomes.....0.....you cease to exist to them. Is that how you want your fellow Americans to exist? To become irrelavent, ignored, undermined, and forgotten? Along with being treated as....less...than human?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
Second. Let me provide you a context as to the current status of the balance of healthcare. Let me state for the record that this is an abstraction, and any attempt to carry the example too far will cause it to break down.
Here you have a plot of land that 100 farmers work on and grow the food for a village of 1,000 people. Everything is stable in the fact that the land provides enough food to feed everybody and nobody goes hungry. Outside of the village, you have a group of undetermined size of hunter-gatherers that are hungry pretty much all of the time. Sometimes they get into the villages food supply and steal some food. This makes the farmers work harder and the people of the village have to go a little hungry and have smaller portions until the balance is restored.
Now, one day, the villagers get the notion to "help" the hunter-gatherers by inviting them to become members of the village. So, the new people are brought into the village. Mind you, the amount of farming land and number of farmers remain the same as before. With more people to feed, but with the same amount of food, portions must be smaller. It's a math issue. No wishing otherwise will make more food grow on the same amount of land. So, now everyone, villagers and hunter-gatherers start to go hungry. On top of that, 2 farmers decide to quit and not work on the land any more because they were against bringing the new group into the village. So now you have more people, less famers and the same amount of land. This will cause the amount of food produced to go down, so everyone will get hungrier. More farmland and farmers must be found or eventually people will starve and die off until a balance is reached again.
Obviously you NEVER cracked open a history book of the world in your life (since your whole idea isnt based on reality). If the hunter-gathers could not find enough to eat close to the village, why would they stay close to the village? Just pure animal instict would drive them towards the areas of food. Why did many American indians on the plains of America not settle in one spot? But instead, followed herds of animals (i.e. Buffalo) because such animals did not stay in one spot for long? Likewise, 'gathers' were the privimative version of the more modern concept.....farmer. If these hunter-gathers are so hungry and armed (cus large animals do defend themselves from humans); why not just gang up and take over the village? Than the hunter-gathers could turn the farmers into slaves and work the fields under a tyrantical king.
Now, if the farmers had thought things through, they could have understood that bring the hunter-gathers into the village would require more fields to be planted, and would need to train the hunter-gathers how to farm correctly. Likewise, all the other logistics would need to be factored in (places to sleep, cloths, medicine, etc). Also, the farmers should ask themselves whether the hunter-gathers wanted to become villagers? You can ask and even offer to mentor them, but if they say 'no', why pursue it? Most wise people would take this and other things into consideration. Generally when tensions and problems arise, its a good idea to let cooler heads prevail.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
That (within the confines of the example) is the current state of the medical field. When we add "13 million" uninsured people into our already strained and overloaded healthcare system, the amount of healthcare that each individual receives will necessarily be smaller. Unless we find a way to add more hospitals, doctors and support staff, rationing will be the result. Add onto that the fact that doctors are getting out of the Medicare/Medicaid system, which will further reduce the capacity in the face of increasing demand. If you think that there won't be at least some kind or form of rationing of healthcare, I want what you're smoking.
Actually, as some posters ahead of me already pointed out, there is rationed care. Those that have health care and those who do not. But, it seems you have rationalized in your mind, that all Americans are equal but some are more equal. What happens when things get reversed? It should be the role of those that have health care find ways to help those who do not, get some. Should the strong defend the weak....or prey on them?
If we are short on doctors and nurses, than its a good idea to example why that is, and if possible make adjustments to entice more into practice. Maybe we cut those executive's pay and perks to 1/10th and give the other 9/10ths to the folks that do the care. I think that would certainly drive more people to practice medicine. In fact, it would restore Americans wishs to see their children to grow up to be doctors, scientists and engineers....rather than what is the norm today: grow up to be lawyers!
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
Medical insurance companies (in fact, any company) are in business to make money. Understand that. Take it to heart. Learn it, live it, love it.
Actually at one time, most medical insurance companies were non-profit. Back then, people felt profiting off the suffering and injured was immoral! Today, 'its just business', and spoken in as cold and uncaring manner as possible (like driving a dagger into someone's back with a twist afterward). Maybe we are tired of that business format and feel things should be different. So.....WE THE PEOPLE, decide on laws that help...the people....and not the corporations out. BUT, we allow a profit to be made, but not to trump the reason for why they are in business in the first place. You want to make big profits? Join a financial company on Wall Street in New York City.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
Remember what insurance is: It's a bet that you make with the insurance company. You are betting that you will need catastrophic health insurance sometime in your life. They charge you an amount appropriate to their actuarial tables that would mean they would still make a profit on you, depending on what lifestyle you have (smoking, obese, etc). Again, they are selling you a service, and it is their right to not sell you that service if they think they won't make money from you. So, pre-existing conditions and lifetime caps are going to be there, no matter if you like it or not. If an insurance company doesn't make money, there is no reason for that company to exist in the first place.
You started this off with 'Health Care', not 'Health Insurance'. Try to stick to your own topic?
But for your paragragh your absolutely correct....EXCEPT...for one fine flaw. You forget that I vote and can create a bill to which the company....MUST....obey. If I can gather many someone's to my cause, the likelyhood of said bill going into law becomes more favorable. But we are not going to force the insurance companies to obey the law so much, as to work within its confines. We direct our goverment to set up programs and agencies to oversee and help those less fortunate then ourselves, get the care they need. And if the companies bitch to much, we inform them that they operate at OUR wishs. Last I checked, the US Goverment operates to the whims of...The People, NOT, the corporations. You might desire to be a slave to the corporation, and be at their full mercy (like Christians thrown to the lions....), but other Americans....DONT.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
With the Affordable Care Act being upheld, this is what we will start seeing. A large rock has been thrown into the pool, and the after effects will not be ripples, but tsunamis.
Depends how big the pool and rock are. But I doubt you have even sat down to actually read the bill; but instead gotten *ALL* your information from others. And as such, have basically been told what to think on it. I feel the bill could have been better. In fact, before the GOP tampering, it was better. I am willing to bet you have no clue what I'm taking about either.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
With the USSC stating that this is a tax, and "you don't have to pay the tax," let's see how many people decide to not file federal income taxes next year, based on that phrase. But I digress.
Sure, if you enjoy getting auditted by the IRS and paying more money in fines, go for it! However, the 'tax' as it were does not go into effect until 2014. So the people not filing their taxes next year (2013) due to the viewpoint of the US Supreme Court is just a display of their ignorance and foolishness. And your going to not file your tax return because of a charge of $285? If you cant afford $285 or 1% of your income (which ever is greater), then seriously....dude....you got some real financial managing problems that have NOTHING to do with the ACA and everything to do with your personality! In 2016, that charge goes up to $2,085 or 2.5% of your income (again, which ever is greater). If you have failed to figure out how to get health insurance that costs $1400/year at that point, your a moron. I fully expect some 'fly by night' operations to give a seedy $1,400/year 'health care insurance' that has nothing in it; and people.....like you.....will pay it rather than the $2.085+/year charge. And when you land in the hospital with dire levels of pain, you'll come to realize it was a very poorly thought out gimmick that now costs you in ways you can not possibly fathom right now.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
I also want a proponent for the ACA (that means someone who is in favor of) to point to me _three_ services provided by the Federal government that was/should be provided by the free market that didn't balloon out of control and cost many times more than what the initial cost was told to us.
I always love these. Its the old 'the goverment can only do wrong, but the company does right' moronic arguements. If we state that a patient can see their doctor, and it costs only $150 for the visit, that's how much the bill will cost. It wont cost more, because the law states the charge is $150. Now, if the law is changed, THEN that charge will change (either higher or lower). Its like playing Monopoly. In the standard rules for the game, there is no money placed on 'Free Parking', nor rules for how or why the money is there should someone land on it. But yet, many people have house rules that place some money on it. Either a standard $500 or that which is collected from all the taxes (from spaces and cards). Once you change a rule to the game, it is no longer the standard edition rules. Who benefits and who loses because of the change?
Some people will want that $150 increased and others will want it decreased. And everyone has an agenda; some are just 'Lawful Good' and others 'Chaotic Evil' in nature. The ACA does not sort every medical concept into a 'List to End All Lists' of exact costs. It gives some limits and definations, but doesnt not go all 'Socialistic' on companies (I know, that surprises you conservatives....).
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
The ACA will cost us $billions (if not even $trillions) more than the wildest expectations and projections of today. The Federal government has proven in every aspect of our lives that no matter how much we are taxed, they will spend that and more, way more.
Oh yes, ANOTHER, conservative tactic: fearmongering. 'Do as I say or else' and 'If we dont elect Republican Joe, we'll be drowning in taxes by that Democrat Bonnie over there!". The idea, is to make the reader afraid that if they dont give you all the power and reigns, bad things will happen to them. Except, if someone asks the conservative to put their money where their mouth is, they generally fail to show what the fear is all about. The ACA will not cost us billions (or trillions). Have you ever gotten a medical bill for visiting the doctor worth $1,000,000,000? Of course not, that's just silly. How about instead of running around, foaming at the mouth, flailing your arms in all directions, and spewing nonsense like "They Sky is Falling" and "The Squirrels Are Going to Take Our Guns Away"....You could go and Read the Actual Bill?
Its not going to cost anywhere in the neighborhood of what FOX News states. They have been wrong countless times. Hell they've out-right lied countless times in the past.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
To sell the idea of "unlimited healthcare" to everyone (and just in case you forgot, even with the ACA, and estimated 2.5 million Americans will still not receive any healthcare) is a lie. So even when "Everyone is insured," not everyone will receive insurance.
Your right, all those conservatives will stick to their 'principles' and NOT become a burden on the rest of us, right? Where did this concept of 'unlimited healthcare' come from exactly? Its in the ACA? Right? Just give me the page number. Cus only a total moron would acuse of such a thing in the ACA when it doesnt exist, right?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Memphismaster61
The costs associated with the ACA will skyrocket, and this may very well be the straw that broke the fiscal camels back and drive the United States into bankruptcy.
When I hear stuff like this (the fearmongerings), I just think on A Scene from the movie 'Ghostbusters'. That we should just give all power without question to our conservative Republican Masters, because they have never failed us, right? How about get the facts and evidence, BEFORE babbling like you dont have a clue and have been listening to the conservative media.
|
RE: My take on the ACA - 
Profile
.gif){kind=avatar}
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread