Jump to content

Hello! Welcome to the Largest Bariatric Surgery Community Online!

Welcome to BariatricPal.com, the largest weight loss surgery social network in the world! Our goal is to provide a unique platform for patients and potential patients alike that enables you to make informed choices involving your surgery decisions as well as providing you the support you need to meet your goals. Sign up now to access exclusive member features!

Join our community. It's free!

Democrats vs republicans

8969
Views
Started by loserbob, Aug 26, 2010 9:38 AM
211 replies to this topic
211 replies to this topic

    loserbob

    Registered User

  • Posts: 692
  • Joined: Apr 2008
  • Surgery: LAP-BAND
Posted August 27, 2010 - 2:45 PM

#25

Ariscus99,
I think I see that you are a conservative pretty clearly and against medical care for all in this country. I have been a nurse for 30 yrs, i have worked in many different specialties and currently am in a large ***. I have to say I am for socialized medicine hands down. I feel that we could provide everybody basic health care much more affordable than the current system of "just show up at the ER" after things have gone to far. If we paid for yearly preventative physicals, mammography, cholestesterol screenings, BP and pulse checks and get to those who have preventable illness or find problems early. This would save us all money! Also mother baby care and those who are disabled need to have regular health screenings. I think that we just cannot go wrong by doing this. Look at what has happened to youngsters in school when we allowed big business in the set up mcdonalds and taco bell in schools and decided PE was to expensive to keep for the kids? It would have been so much better to have excellent healthful cafeteria's in schools and push for PE and sex education in schools? these poor kids have suffered. Socialized programs that serve the public as a whole are much better than waiting until folks are sick and disabled and then trying to make lame excuses why we cannot help them because oh my it is "socialism". This is America and we can afford to do this once we clean up after the republican mess of the past 25-30 yrs of damage. The gap between rich and poor is just shameful and we all need to remain vigilant until we can get back on track but we don't abandon our own. I am an independent and have been for many years I am conservative about some issues fiscally but really none socially.



Thats why I pay to send my kids to Catholic school. They have a company called the nutrition group who does their lunches. Last year they used Aramark whose lunches where terribly unhealthy. They served alot of processed foods, chix nuggets, frozen waffles, everything was easily prepared. Parents complained so they have a company who pays more attention to nutrition and health. They have no soda pop machines, at least not for the kids. My kids are both in elementary school and I think its very important to start youg, theyre very influencial and only know what theyre taught. Why not teach them to be healthy!


    Murpel

    Registered User

  • Posts: 97
  • Joined: Jun 2010
  • Location: AZ
  • Surgery: LAP-BAND
  • Surgeon: James Atkinson
  • Surgery Date: May 2010
  • Starting Weight: 244 lbs
  • Weight Lost: 41 lbs
  • Current Weight: 203 lbs
  • Goal Weight: 140 lbs
  • BMI: 34.8
  • My Blogs
Posted August 27, 2010 - 2:53 PM

#26
"If we aren't a country that provides for health insurance for all of our people then what are we?"

Answer: If we do provide medical procedures and facilities for "All", then we are a communist state.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"If we tell a little 8 year old girl that her diabetes can't be treated because we don't have insurance or the money to pay for it and there is no government program, what does that say about us?"

Answer: There is a program in place, it's called Medicare or Medicaid, or by the state... in AZ it's called Access. Want to guess who pays for this?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The republicans want everything to be about privledge - the haves and the have nots."

Answer: This Republican would like it to be about accountability and choice.
This Republican would like to see all the aid and money that goes to other countries stay in this country. Why feed starving kids in other countries when children in MY United States are going to school hungry, going to bed hungry, wearing shoes with holes in them?
Too much to want? I think not!

Edited by Murpel, August 27, 2010 - 2:57 PM.



    ariscus99

    Registered User

  • Posts: 445
  • Joined: Feb 2008
  • Surgery: LAP-BAND
Posted August 27, 2010 - 3:00 PM

#27
:biggrin: I agree

"If we aren't a country that provides for health insurance for all of our people then what are we?"

Answer: If we do provide medical procedures and facilities for "All", then we are a communist state.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"If we tell a little 8 year old girl that her diabetes can't be treated because we don't have insurance or the money to pay for it and there is no government program, what does that say about us?"

Answer: There is a program in place, it's called Medicare or Medicaid, or by the state... in AZ it's called Access. Want to guess who pays for this?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The republicans want everything to be about privledge - the haves and the have nots."

Answer: This Republican would like it to be about accountability and choice.
This Republican would like to see all the aid and money that goes to other countries stay in this country. Why feed starving kids in other countries when children in MY United States are going to school hungry, going to bed hungry, wearing shoes with holes in them?
Too much to want? I think not!




Posted August 27, 2010 - 4:48 PM

#28

"If we aren't a country that provides for health insurance for all of our people then what are we?"

Answer: If we do provide medical procedures and facilities for "All", then we are a communist state.

Then make sure you don't accept social security or medicare, both socialist (or in your view, communist) programs. And if you live long enough you will receive more in benefits than you paid.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"If we tell a little 8 year old girl that her diabetes can't be treated because we don't have insurance or the money to pay for it and there is no government program, what does that say about us?"

Answer: There is a program in place, it's called Medicare or Medicaid, or by the state... in AZ it's called Access. Want to guess who pays for this?

Medicare is for those receiving social security, not an 8 year old. :biggrin: And all of those without insurance don't automatically qualify for medicaid. There are government programs, like SCHIP for children, which I strongly support and which many republicans don't. And yes we pay for this as taxpayers, so what? I don't want kids to die for lack of health insurance. Do you?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The republicans want everything to be about privledge - the haves and the have nots."

Answer: This Republican would like it to be about accountability and choice.
This Republican would like to see all the aid and money that goes to other countries stay in this country. Why feed starving kids in other countries when children in MY United States are going to school hungry, going to bed hungry, wearing shoes with holes in them?
Too much to want? I think not!

Our foreign aid to children is really only a small part of our government spending compared to what we spend on aid for children here, whether it's aid to families with dependent children, SCHIP, or subsidized school lunches, among others.

Edited by Cleo's Mom, August 27, 2010 - 5:30 PM.



Posted August 27, 2010 - 5:27 PM

#29
Tort Reform Myth: The Legal System Causes High Malpractice Insurance Premiums


Wayne Parsons

Attorney


What causes high premiums for doctors' malpractice insurance? The insurance industry would have you believe that the cause is the legal system. The truth is that insurance company investment practices are the cause. Americans for Insurance Reform - one of the leading consumer advocates for regular people not the privileged and powerful, has issued a series of fact sheets on these tort reform myths:
INSURANCE INDUSTRY’S INVESTMENT PRACTICES –
NOT THE LEGAL SYSTEM –
CAUSE HIGH MALPRACTICE INSURANCE COSTS

Here are the facts, not the insurance industry hype:


THE INSURANCE CYCLE, NOT THE LEGAL SYSTEM, DRIVES UP RATES

  • Typical Soft Market: Insurers make most of their money from investment income. During years of high interest rates and/or excellent insurer profits, insurance companies engage in fierce competition for premium dollars to invest for maximum return. Insurers severely underprice their policies and insure poor risks (where there likely will be claims to pay) just to get premium dollars to invest. This is known as the “soft” insurance market. Americans for Insurance Reform, Stable Losses/Unstable Rates 2007.
  • Typical Hard Market: When investment income decreases because interest rates drop or the stock market plummets, or price cuts during the soft market make unbearably low profits, the industry responds by sharply increasing premiums and reducing coverage, creating a “hard” insurance market usually degenerating into a “liability insurance crisis.” Americans for Insurance Reform, Stable Losses/Unstable Rates 2007.
  • Periodic Cycles: Such “liability insurance crises” associated with “hard markets,” have occurred three times in the last 30 years – in the mid 1970s, in the mid-1980s, and between 2002 and 2006. Eventually, rates stabilized and availability improved everywhere as the “soft market” took hold.Americans for Insurance Reform, Stable Losses/Unstable Rates 2007.
  • With each new hard market, insurers have tried to cover up their investment losses by blaming lawyers and the legal system. To buy this position, one would have to accept the notion that juries engineered large jury awards in the mid-1970s, then stopped for a decade, then started again in the mid-1980s, stopped 17 years and the started again from 2002-2006. This is ludicrous, and not true. At no time did claims or payouts spike during these period and since 1975, medical malpractice payouts have risen almost precisely in sync with medical inflation. Americans for Insurance Reform, Stable Losses/Unstable Rates 2007.

The facts produced by Americans For Insurance Reform are devastating to anyone who cares about the truth - journalists and elected politicians, are you listening and reading and thinking? The fact is that insurance company insiders have agreed:


  • Victor Schwartz, General Counsel, American Tort Reform Association: “Insurance was cheaper in the 1990s because insurance companies knew that they could take a doctor's premium and invest it, and $50,000 would be worth $200,000 five years later when the claim came in … An insurance company today can't do that.” Honolulu Star Bulletin, April 20, 2003.
  • National Underwriter: Standard & Poor’s Rating Service in London, recognizing problems created by “historic highs and lows of cyclical underwriting,” is calling for the industry to change its underwriting practices. S&P’s Christian Dinesen says, “A less cyclical insurance market would be revolutionary for the industry, with such fundamental change promising a more stable underwriting environment.” National Underwriter Online, October 29, 2002.
  • Wall Street Journal: “[A] price war that began in the early 1990s led insurers to sell malpractice coverage to obstetrician-gynecologists at rates that proved inadequate to cover claims.… Some of these carriers had rushed into malpractice coverage because an accounting practice widely used in the industry made the area seem more profitable in the early 1990s than it really was. A decade of short-sighted price slashing led to industry losses of nearly $3 billion last year.” Wall Street Journal, June 24, 2002.
  • Donald J. Zuk, chief executive of Scpie Holdings Inc.: “I don’t like to hear insurance-company executives say it’s the tort system – it’s self-inflicted.” Wall Street Journal, June 24, 2002.
  • Charles Kolodkin, Gallagher Healthcare Insurance Services: “The [medical malpractice insurance] market is in chaos…Throughout the 1990s…insurers were…driven by a desire to accumulate large amounts of capital with which to turn into investment income. Regardless of the level of…tort reform, the fact remains that if insurance policies are consistently underpriced, the insurer will lose money.” “Medical Malpractice Trends?”, September 2001.
  • National Association of Attorneys General: “The facts do not bear out the allegations of an ‘explosion’ in litigation or in claim size, nor do they bear out the allegations of a financial disaster suffered by property/casualty insurers today. They finally do not support any correlations between the current crisis in availability and affordability of insurance and such a litigation ‘explosion.’ Instead, the available data indicate that the causes of, and therefore solutions to, the current crisis lie with the insurance industry itself.” Analysis of the Causes of the Current Crisis of Unavailability and Unaffordability of Liability Insurance, Ad Hoc Insurance Committee of the National Association of Attorneys General, May 1986.
  • Maurice R. Greenberg, them President and CEO of American International Group, Inc. - AIG: “The industry’s problems were due to price cuts taken ‘to the point of absurdity’ in the early 1980s. Had it not been for these cuts, Greenberg said, there would not be ‘all this hullabaloo’ about the tort system.” Business Week, March 31, 1986.

The tort reform movement is brought to you by the insurance industry - AIG and the same band of scoundrels who took Wall Street down with their financial misconduct and accept your premiums and deny your claims. Do you believe the falsehoods they spread? And where is our news media on these issues. The truth is easy to prove. Does Major media care about anything but ratings and getting sponsors? The news? Oh, that. Who cares. So you have to get it here and on The Daily Kos, The Huffington Post and The Injury Board. Americans For Insurance Reform are just getting into the fray. They are great at documenting the truth. Go to their website and support them. They make a difference in breaking down these insurance company tactics.

So, malpractice premiums go up when the insurance companies lose money in the stock market just like the rest of us, but we don't have a way to recoup those losses. They do. It's not because of rising jury awards, which, at least in my state, have decreased.

Edited by Cleo's Mom, August 27, 2010 - 5:29 PM.



    sagreenia

    Registered User

  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: Aug 2010
  • Location: OR
  • Surgery: LAP-BAND
  • Surgery Date: Aug 2010
  • Starting Weight: 240 lbs
  • Weight Lost: 0 lbs
  • Current Weight: 240 lbs
  • Goal Weight: 160 lbs
  • BMI: 45.3
Posted August 27, 2010 - 5:52 PM

#30
I see that you have some concerns about "wealth redistribution" that is such a buzz term and really silly. I happen to also work for Kaiser and have for 13 yrs and love it! We give good care and every one i work with is pretty happy including Dr's. it is not perfect by any stretch but we all do our level best to provide good care. I know alot of people feel differently than I do but the one thing we all have in common is a love of country and other Americans. I would do anything to keep our country safe and living in peace and I just don't beleive the republicans know what they are doing, they are so for the rich and the big business that may give them a great job or something when they leave congress or whatever. The democrats do it too. that is why I went independent. In the end us folks in the middle want to same thing a great place to raise kids and home to live in when old and feeble and healthcare for all. We deserve it and We should really make some hard changes to accomplish these basic care needs. The rich need to have that tax cut ended and our government needs to GET BUSY and get it done.


Posted August 27, 2010 - 6:13 PM

#31

I see that you have some concerns about "wealth redistribution" that is such a buzz term and really silly. I happen to also work for Kaiser and have for 13 yrs and love it! We give good care and every one i work with is pretty happy including Dr's. it is not perfect by any stretch but we all do our level best to provide good care. I know alot of people feel differently than I do but the one thing we all have in common is a love of country and other Americans. I would do anything to keep our country safe and living in peace and I just don't beleive the republicans know what they are doing, they are so for the rich and the big business that may give them a great job or something when they leave congress or whatever. The democrats do it too. that is why I went independent. In the end us folks in the middle want to same thing a great place to raise kids and home to live in when old and feeble and healthcare for all. We deserve it and We should really make some hard changes to accomplish these basic care needs. The rich need to have that tax cut ended and our government needs to GET BUSY and get it done.


I agree with much of what you say. To those who say "I don't want to pay for other people's healthcare" - I say - we all pay for each other benefits. If you work for a private company that depends on government contracts (like Westinghouse research or Boeing or Lockheed Martin) then my tax dollars go to pay for your job. If your congressman takes federal dollars back to your district for some project then my tax dollars are being used to help the people in your district and visa versa. That's what redistribution of tax dollars is all about. You have the right to contact your rep if you don't like where your tax dollars are going.

For social security - the deduction you pay now from your paycheck is going to today's recipients and when you retire and receive SS it will come from that time's current worker's contributions. The problem is that when SS was started there were 13 workers for every recipient and today there are 3. Plus only the first $106,000 in wages is taxed. How stupid is that? Why should Bill Gates only pay SS taxes on the first $106,000 of his earnings? Tax 100 percent of earnings. Most people earn under $106,000 anyway so it won't affect them.


Posted August 27, 2010 - 6:19 PM

#32
The best fix for healthcare, IMO, still would have been insurance reform. Now I know that because cm thinks I'm a conservative that that means I want no government whatsoever and no government regulation whatsoever. For some reason she can't see that there is a happy medium somewhere along the line. Had we made some strict regulations for ins companies, got rid of the pre existing conditions restrictions, and had some MAJOR tort reform, most of this could have been fixed.[/QUOTE]

That's what we got. Without the public option we have no real competition and therefore price control. We got rid of the worst insurance abuses. And tort reform won't really lower malpractice insurance premiums. Read the article I posted. Insurance companies need to raise rates to recoup investment losses.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Recent Topics

Recent Status Updates

  • Photo
      Jul 25
    Zoey716

    No AM workout today. But you better believe I'm heading to the gym right...

    Show comments (2)
  • Photo
      Jul 25
    pupichupi

    Leaving in the morning for my mini vacation to cape cod, I can't wait to...

    Show comments (4)
View All Updates

Trending Topics