Public Healthcare = Reality Televison

The way I see it is this: you've got a finite number of doctors, hospitals, medical equipment and a finite number of hours in the day. If you add 20% to the patient load then services will have to be reduced or doctors will have to work longer (for less money by the way) and quality care will suffer.

But then again I'm just a fishy, un-American, astroturfing mob participant.

Analogies are such a powerful way to make a point.

Exactly….

This whole plan is a disaster….

They are not that efficient and have no intention of coming up with a plan to pay down the national debt.

I just saw a story that quoted Obama saying people that critics are using scare tactics. That's funny coming from the guy that said we need to do this now or we'll face some sort of catastrophe.

This guy is unbelievable, did anyone in this "townhall" ask him a tough question or was it filled with Obamabots?

And even if you still want to fight it by not paying it, too bad. Your accounts will be opened by Obama and company.

Obamabots and paid "grass roots" people.

What? The uninsured are scabs and the insured are a protected class of people who can afford health care? Really? Are you sure this isn't more like the Ricci case where people who need health care are being denied coverage because people with insurance want to be promoted at the expense of people who show that they exhibit characteristics that should qualify them for coverage? And why would people with health care want their premiums to escalate because of the bad debt written off and passed along due to people not having health insurance?

every thing needs to get done NOW, THERE IS NO TIME TO WASTE WEMUSTSTOPTHEIMPENDINGDISASTER!!
So congress hurries up and votes on stuff they don't understand let alone read. and badd things continue to happen.
Is it too much to ask that the deadline of tomorrow by 3pm be etended to give the stakeholders time to have input? Why the hurry?
I read an article complaining about Massachewsetts care and ho wit wasn't all that great, but that is the reason we need it nationwide.
We really need to step back and think things through in this country.

I wonder if any of the MSM will question why in every other townhall meeting the politician is booed and asked questions that they can't or won't answer and Obama's was like a campaign rally…

I doubt it….cowards….

You are legion.

this is exactly what the WH is looking for. consider yourself turned in….and welcome to the club.

Of course, BuckwheatPicard, you do realize that your health care wasn't really "at no cost to me", right?

There is no free lunch. Your employer offered health care, because it was cheaper for them than paying you a higher salary. While you might have been satisfied with the trade-off, it is still important to remember that it did cost you that lost income.

Thx for tolerating my diatribe.

Regards,

Cliff

I used to think that Obama was smart. But he just said, "UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. It's the Post Office that's always having problems." Yes, right! Isn't that our point? Government run health care will be like the Post Office, and DMV and every other crappy government run 'organization'. Enough is enough!

Obots. Not to mention, he's the boogeyman in the room.

Water is essential for life. So why doesn't the government provide it for free? Because ever nation that does that RUNS OUT OF WATER. The same with nations that over regulate or over subsidize water. Some feel that water is so important that it must be rationed from the start. All those nations RUN OUT OF WATER.

Examples, Algeria and Egypt come to mind. Only nations that charge for water and treat it like a business have adequate water supplies. That is the only reason Los Angeles, a desert and the largest city in America, has water.

p.s. Capitalism is awesome.

indeed, doesn't he know the secret service comes equipped with a box of tissues?

yep, it's not rock science either

but too many in congress aren't the sharpest bulbs in the deck as it is.

There you go againn with the math and common sense to buttress facts people…obvious racism…

The whole "47 million uninsured" is a scam. 20% are people who are wealthy enough to be self-insured, and pay cash for their treatments. 20% are illegal aliens. 20% are people who, although they earn enough to pay for their health care, or have it available through their employers, choose not to be covered because they don't think they need it. 20% are actually poor enough to be covered through Medicaid.

This means that we are supposed to submit to this $1 trillion boondoggle and give up the insurance plans which 80% of us say we're pretty satisfied with to extend coverage for 5 million uninsured, non-Medicaid individuals.

It would be a lot cheaper and a lot less intrusive if the government just gave them a check to buy their own private plan, but hey, why let a good crisis go to waste?

(…continued)

Not long into the investigation, the insurer canceled her policy. Beaton, they said, had listed her weight incorrectly when she bought it, and had also failed to disclose that she'd once taken medicine for a heart condition — which she hadn't been taking at the time she filled out the application. By October, thanks to an intervention from her member of Congress, Blue Cross reinstated Beaton's insurance coverage. But the tumor she had removed had grown 2 centimeters in the meantime, and she had to have her lymph nodes removed as well as her breasts amputated because of the delay.

(…continued)

Not long into the investigation, the insurer canceled her policy. Beaton, they said, had listed her weight incorrectly when she bought it, and had also failed to disclose that she'd once taken medicine for a heart condition — which she hadn't been taking at the time she filled out the application. By October, thanks to an intervention from her member of Congress, Blue Cross reinstated Beaton's insurance coverage. But the tumor she had removed had grown 2 centimeters in the meantime, and she had to have her lymph nodes removed as well as her breasts amputated because of the delay.

I heard that someone bought a car one time new, and it broke down all the time. Does that mean Government should take over the whole car industry?

I bought food at the store one time and it was rotten, should Government take over the food industry.

Do you want me to go on. Everything is not perfect all the time. Utopia does not exist on this earth and Government is not the solution.

If the Presidents plan was truthful and would only be another option available. Then why would any increase in taxes be needed from anyone?

If the playing field is level as the President claims under his plan would there not be profits that would help pay down the national debt?

I could support a Government Health option plan that helped pay down National Debt. If this administration is so efficient then they need to come up with this plan with no tax increases or penalties on the american people

While I am generally not a huge union supporter, you have a good point: if you show up with cancer and all of a sudden start paying into the system, you have no history of keeping the system afloat. The pre-existing condition exclusion while crummy for the individual makes sense for the whole.

I haven't worked at a soup kitchen since the recipients complained that they were tired of the food and demanded more variety.

UPDATE: I am one of those who is pretty happy with my health insurance. My company used to provide it for the whole family at no cost to me, but that has changed, and I'm still happy with it.

The only way to pay down ANY debt is to stop spending more than you make. That can only be accomplished in one of two ways: lower your actual spending or increase your income. Not exactly rocket surgery.

The government has no source of "income" except taxation. And General Motors, if you count that.

Included in the famous 47 million uninsured number that gets bandied about so often: illegal aliens, people with household incomes in excess of $50,000 per year who could COULD purchase insurance, but for any number of reasons choose not to, and people who qualify for other government health programs (both federal and state) such as medicare, medicaide, chips etc., but for one reason or another, choose not to use programs for which they are eligible. Once you realize that, the number of people without insurance with incomes under $50,000 is much smaller, say 8 or 9 million. Government has NEVER, NEVER, EVER, done anything efficiently. They may throw taxpayers money at the problem, but claiming to become more efficient is just politician's bullsh**!

"As his campaign ads stated, Obama wants this plan put into effect because he wants to find a middle ground between "government bureaucracy" and "runaway private insurers." This is impossible and will only result in socialized medicine and disaster, because to achieve this supposedly perfect system requires more government intervention every time it doesn't work."
if you were a true intellectual, you wouldn't write sentences like that. YOU should put more time into your posts, Sir. People who live in glass houses…

"I heard that someone bought a car one time new, and it broke down all the time. Does that mean Government should take over the whole car industry?"

so I posted some anecdotal evidence, and your point is essentially, that my point is an exception and not the rule. A mere anomaly.

( If I were to posit to you, hypothetically, that maybe the "death panel" situation that Mrs. Palin is so scared of might just be some extremely unlikely and rare situation at best. Hmmm, well, would anyone here consider THAT with so much even-handled perspective? HA! )

No no no, the fact is that MOST Americas know that our health care system is broken, and that situations like Robin Beaton's are all too common.

this isn't about "creating utopia". This is about: We are America. We can do better.

First of all, it isn't 40 million. I think the actual number of those who want health coverage and can't get/afford it is around 12 million, and most of them will get coverage through employment.

But the article makes a good point. I'd only add that since Hollywood generally supports ObamaCare for the rest of us, then why not dump every actor and wannabee actor into the "role pool" and let George Clooney wait his turn for a part just like we'll have to wait our turn for an MRI that might save our lives.

If any of us were "true intellectuals", we wouldn't waste our valuable thinking time by posting stuff here at all. You aren't converting anyone.

You really seem to have a martyr complex. You must want the abuse, because that's all you ever get for coming here. But the problem with trying to crucify yourself is, there's no way to drive in that last nail.

"non-union actors (who we call 'scabs' during strikes) are threatening the long standing system by jumping into the pool without regard for those who have worked hard to achieve their status and benefits"

I love scabs. They demonstrate that unions aren't there for "the workers," but rather exist to serve some small subset of workers that are lucky enough to be in the union.

As for "those who have worked hard to achieve their status and benefits, you mean as evidenced by their cracking SAG? For some it takes hard work to get to that level, I guess, but who cares? It's not artistic merit at issue, but ability to get casted and please audiences, right? And, at the very bottom, to earn a living. Why should Certified Actors be the only ones to earn a living entertaining television audiences? Don't reality stars entertain just as much (again, not in aesthetic terms, but in the sense of ratings and revenue)?

"It would be a lot cheaper and a lot less intrusive if the government just gave them a check to buy their own private plan"

Yes, but we're not doing this to save the uninsured. We're doing it because private industry must be controlled by the feds. Because free markets don't work and individuals cannot provide for their own well being. Haven't you heard?

"And you honestly believe that moving the decision process to a government bureaucracy would have provided Ms. Beaton with better, more responsive and more humane service?"

YES! Take, for example, the man who stood halfway through Specter's town hall Wednesday morning to share his personal story — a real tear-jerker: A disabled veteran, he'd just been laid off and was without health insurance when his wife became ill and was told she needed a heart transplant. Now, two years later, she's still alive because the state paid for the procedure.

The really dumb part of that anecdote is this guy – after the STATE saved his wife's life – went on to complain about Democratic reform plans and how the bill is "socialistic".

But whatever. The point is that YES, I think a non-profit organization (e.g. the government) is more likely to do what is right rather than look out for their bottom line.

I copied the story about Robin Beaton directly from this article by Mike Madden:
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/08/11/deni...

Obama = Hitler

Breitbart said nothing about dissent on this board. But don't drag Breitbart into this, as usual like most liberals you paint one conservative (Breitbart) with your misinterpretation of what another conservative (the poster) says. However as a regular poster I feel you're more than welcome to post here because you usually try to actually argue a point.

Pleease don't tell me you are the 38 yr old loser actor from Austin Texas that failed to graduate from 3 different schools. Are you really complaining about others getting the union benefits you get from being a complete failure in your profession?

Come back and talk to me when you learn to spell the name of the medium in which you wish you were successful…

Hey asshole, it's spelled "television,"not "televison." You should have just gone with TV, but you probably would have found a way to fuck that up too.

The kids would qualify for medicaid if they need medical care. Their folks might qualify also. And a few years ago it paid at 8% of cash price. Boy, I can see a lot of investment on healthcare with that kind of money.

I want to thank you for the link.
The system has a natural fix for these kinds of situations. It's called the Tort system. John Edwards is partial to it, and Obama doesn't want to reform it. So, it should be around for awhile.

Also, no one has to choose Blue Cross. FHP in California went broke for pulling things like this, and Blue Cross can be forced to behave better with market pressure too.

"as usual like most liberals you paint one conservative (Breitbart) with your misinterpretation of what another conservative (the poster) says."

I did not misinterpret, nor I did not try to "paint" breit bart. I said IF. Because I am allowed to be here, then I assume that either good ol' Andy B welcomes me, or at least considers me a necessary evil, "cost of doing business" etc.

(how is that for arguing the point? usual like most liberals huh? HA!)

Bush = Hitler

Spot the irony "like most liberals you paint one conservative with your misinterpretation of what another conservative says."

This is an absolutely idiotic statement. How do you think the water that flows from the taps in your house gets there? (Hint: it's not the underpants gnomes.)

No one is talking about providing health care for free; what is under discussion is requiring people to have health insurance and finding a way for all of us to be able to afford health care–just like the rest of the industrialized world does. This obviously involves reworking the way health care is paid for and delivered. Luckily there are a ton of examples out there of systems which do it way better than it is done here in the good old US of A.

It was a perfect statement. You get a product and pay for it, making you be more careful how you use it.

There are tons of examples, but none with the quality of care we receive. Look at cancer survivability rates.

For what it's worth, I loathe reality shows. But I can't understand this equivalency between food or insurance witha TV gig. Food and health care are in an entirely different class of commodity than a role on a TV show. Food and proper medical care are necessary. A reality TV gig is not.

Single-payer health care is not even close to a live issue in Congress. I don't want it any more than you do, Morgan. What the various bills propose is universal access through some sort of public option for people without private insurance. And this is not a zero-sum game. How does a publicly funded health care option demean the accomplishments of somebody with private coverage?

The heirloom tomatoes I buy at the farmers' market don't taste any worse for the fact that some people eat at a soup kitchen or get their groceries from a charity pantry. In fact, I enjoy them more after working a volunteer shift, reminded of what I'm lucky enough to have.

Buckwheat Picard, I understand your frustration – I've heard people bitch about bland menus from time to time, but far more often I hear thanks from people who really needed a hand. Treat people well – as Hamlet says, "Use every man after his desert, and who shall 'scape whipping? Use them after your own honor and dignity. The less they deserve, the more merit is in your bounty."

What the hell is a Televison?