Who’s getting tired of all the ads that are calling the proposals for Health Care reform “Socialized Medicine”? Even the most liberal approach to the reforms “Single Payer” is not at all socialized medicine. At most, it might me considered “socialized payment” or “socialized administration”. None of the plans call for socialized medicine, if you are one that falls for this misinformation then the Insurance Companies are getting just what they want from you.

A more realistic example of socialized medicine would be the British System, in which the hospitals are run by the government and the doctors are on the payroll of the government. Another example closer to home would be the VA in which the government provides the hospitals and the doctors to vets. What is being proposed here “Single Payer or a Government Option” is a system in which the federal program only takes the place of the insurance company and pays the bills to the doctors or the hospitals. This program is more analogous to the Canadian and French systems. The beauty of this program is that it takes away the insanity that doctors have to go thru in dealing with hundreds of separate carriers and it provides coverage for everyone regardless of pre-existing conditions.

Do you really have a personal relationship with your insurance provider today? Do you even have a choice in which carrier you get? Most people don’t, they have to take whatever carrier their company provides for them. And then, once they take the carrier that is provided, they usually have to pick a doctor that is on the plan that the company offers. I don’t know about you, but that doesn’t sound like a lot of free choice to me. You are being lied to by Insurance Companies. Single Payer will provide more choice and more cost savings to the average household. The only group that will suffer form this are the Insurance Carriers, and they will tell you every lie they can to stop it from being implemented. I don’t have a lot of sympathy for these companies. The way I see it, they are a big reason costs have escalated and quality of care has decreased over the last 30 years.

First of all, middle class wage earners saw a reduction in withholding taxes back in April and therefore an INCREASE in their paychecks.

When you tax the wealthy and big businesses, you are in essence "taxing' the average American. I say this because when big businesses get taxed excessively by big government, they pass their loss onto the consumer, which is you and me. They do this by increasing their sales prices. Everything you purchase from gasoline to food and electricity goes up. They do not take the loss, everyone else does. When the landlord of your apt. has to pay more for water and taxes on the property he owns, he doesn't absorb the loss, he passes it down to the renter who now has an increase in rent. Taxing the rich is putting a strain on everyone. Believe me, this money that the government is spending is coming from somewhere, and it's everyones pocket, the poor, middle, and higher classes of people.

If they are bringing home less money it is because their healtcare premiums have risen.

They're not bringing home less money. They are paying MORE for everyhing. Have you looked at your electricity bill lately? This is due to the spending in government and how the taxing of the wealthy passes it on to the average consumer. My health care premiums haven't gone up. And if others have, it's for the same reason that everything has gone up. We owe the government too much, and we have to pay them back for everything they spend. It's not in taxes that they get their money from the poor and the middle class people; It's in higher consumer prices and insurance prices and food and cost of living prices. I owned a say care business at one time. Whenever the cost of living went up in any way, I raised my day care rates. I was always paid well enough to keep mt standard of living where I wanted it. I am also a landlord. Whenever they raise the taxes on my home, I raise the rents of my apartments on the tenants. The government needs to stop their spending so we can afford to live.

This was a result of Obama's keeping his promise to reduce taxes on middle America.

Like I said, it's just a campagn hoax. He knows full well that when you raise the taxes on those who make millions, that they in turn pass their loss onto us in the form of higher cost of living. Either way, the government is getting their money for their spending spree. What's the difference if you shell out the dough in taxes, or in higher heating and electrical and food expenses? None.

Second - wealthy americans have seen their income rise due to the tax cuts given them by the bush administration. Obama wants to roll back the their tax cuts to what they were in the Clinton administration. I support that.

They need to cut government jobs. If they started slashing all of the programs that aren't critically essential (and there are many) and keep their taxes at bay, they could pay off their debt.

Obama has a lot on his plate - a huge mess left over from the bush administration.

True, plus the even huger mess he's making all on his own.

The economy was number one. And all indications are that the stimulus is working - slowly - but working. Unemployment will be the last indicator to improve. But it's like if your basement is flooded up to the ceiling and someone comes with buckets to bail out the water to keep it from reaching your first floor living area. It helps avoid a bigger disaster but you still have a flooded basement. It will take time. I read everyday about towns that are depending on that stimulus money to keep from laying off workers or to do shovel ready projects.

And what will happen to these employers when the stimulus money runs out? They will be right back to where they were.

Obama was damned if he did, and damned if he didn't. Had he not done anything for the economy - it would have gotten much worse.

The people always pull out of a recession all on their own. It's the rollercoaster of the economy. This has happened before, and no big government stepped in to the rescue us by splurging finances, and we recovered just fine. What he did was not necessary. All he did was further us into oblivion with debt!

And people would have blamed him. What he had done is put money into the economy to stimulate it. And he gets blamed for that. He gives middle class america a tax cut and gets no credit.

Healthcare reform has to happen now. The time is right, in fact, long overdue. Obama knows that. If it seems like there it too much too soon it is because the bush administration ignored too many problems.

Now, about the free enterprise. After the depression, the Glass-Steagall Act was passed that separated investment and commercial banking activities. It was believed that commercial banks took too much risk with depositors money. This act worked well for over 50 years until 3 Republicans, a republican controlled congress and a republican president (bush) changed it in 1999 with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which eliminated this act and its restrictions and paved the way for the economic disasters that happened on Wall Street last year.

You might remember Phil Gramm - the one who said the american people were whining about the economy.

..........................................................

PG: You are confusing rolling back the tax cuts to the wealthy with big business. I am talking about those individual wage earners who earn $250,000+. They are the ones who benefited the most from the republican tax cuts of the last 25 years. While middle class and poor wage earners saw their incomes in terms of buying power, go down.

When Mr. Richey Rich, a bean counter on Wall Street who earns $300,000, sees his tax cuts rolled back to where they were under Clinton he does NOT pass this on to anyone. He's just paying a fairer share.

Social Security taxes are paid on the first $106,000 you make - which essentially is almost all wage earners in America. Which means that for most of us, we pay social security taxes on 100% of our wages. That means Bill Gates only pays social security taxes on his first $106,000. How fair is that? Everyone's wages should be taxed for social security at 100%. This change is in the works but I don't know how far it has gone. I support this.

Utilities are publicly owned and supported. They have to get permission for the PUC to raise rates. They can't just do so capriciously.

And we weren't headed for a recession, we were already in one, we were headed for a full blown depression and I am glad that the steps Obama took averted it. We are already getting a return on the money loaned to the banks with the bailout. They are paying us back the money with interest.

The government has always played a role in the economy with interest rates set by the federal reserve, etc...so when we have pulled out of past recessions our government was involved in small or big ways.

When the wealthy and big business have been given all the tax breaks and incentives and they simply shove all their profits into their pockets and continue to raise their prices for even more pocket stuffing, the time has come to put a stop to it!!!!

When was the last time that a large corporation made obscene profits and decided to pass the savings on to you? When was the last time the electric companies lowered your rates? It was when the goverment became involved and forced them to.

When THE telephone company kept gouging us and our phone service became unaffordable, the government had to step in and force them to break it down and the government created a situation where THE telephone company could no longer have a monopoly on something as basic as telephone communication.

I guess if you're a slumlord and a business owner, it is understandable why you're all for obscene profits. You aren't bothered by the fact that the poor are getting poorer and the middle class in America have been losing jobs and losing their homes. And the wealthy? They're wealthier than ever, by such a long shot that there are have been more billionaires created in this country than anyone would have thought possible. These billionaires have been created over the same period of time when our poor and middle class have been getting their backs broken by all of the unfair advantages that the wealthy have over them. What part of that is fair and what part of that is good for America as a country? Especially when these filthy rich corporations do not pay their fair share in taxes which would go a long way in helping bring some fiscal balance to the picture.

You probably think that it is wonderful that someone like Ted Turner is so unbelievably wealthy that he can go around the world and buy up millions upon millions of acres of land, supposedly in the interest of environmental protection. Never mind that millions of Americans couldn't afford to have access to the cable television that Mr. Turner made much of his money on.

You probably think it is fabulous that two of the most wealthy men in America have joined together to set up a philanthropic organization to do some good, right? Well what I'd like to know is why those same men didn't cut their prices for computer software for instance, which might have made them less able to give away money, but would have allowed more Americans to have access to that fabulous computer software. Greed and power - it's all good right?

When does conscience play a role in capitalism? When does responsibility in business and love of one's country and one's fellowman play a role in big business? When did loyalty to one's employees get replaced by a corporation's need to make obscene profits? When did "downsizing" a company's workforce so that their bottom line looked better and watching their employees get booted out of their homes become such an acceptable way of doing business in America?

Do you have no concept of fairness and caring and trust and all the good things in life? Why does the love of money have to be what America is all about? Why does the acquisition of material things and power over others have to supercede everything else in this country?

Why doesn't this greedy corporate behavior stick in your craw and make you PB? :biggrin:

Why can't everyone understand this?

Again, I respectfully assert that you'll never be able to understand America's opposition until you get more in touch with the majority of regular people. You're too far to the left to see why. And apparently, I can't explain it to you, because when I try, you let loose on my character, my condescending attitude, my power-mad, post-correcting tendencies.

I like it when you're respectfully assertive.

What makes you think that the majority of Americans think about it as you do? (um, the majority of REGULAR people? Versus irregular people? Please explain the difference between the regular people and the irregular ones.)

At any rate, I respectfully disagree that the majority of people believe as you do about the healthcare crisis. You can't understand that because you obviously surround yourself with people and information that feeds your thought processes to the exclusion of all else.

http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/31/are-profits-on-tarp-funds-enough-feel-free-to-change/?scp=2&sq=tarp&st=cse

It’s funny how all the news about TARP at it’s inception was how horrible it was to use tax dollars to bail out Wall Street and how our money would be just pissed away. I do agree with the author of the article that we could have gotten an even better deal. Also, I can’t say I agreed with everything they did with the bailouts, but like Obama and McCain (and even Bush) I did believe at the time we had to do something – and TARP is what we came up with. Well, look at where we are now!!! About a year later and we are already getting paid back, and at a profit at that. That and the fact that most economic experts have said the banks are in a much better situation than they were back then. How is that even possible? Imagine that, a big government program that not only worked, it worked to our financial benefit.

Where are all the Chicken Little’s now? The ones that said if we passed TARP and the other bailouts it would be the end of democracy as we know it? Oh wait, I think I see them... They are off of that soapbox now (because they were wrong), and now they are out just as vocally trying to convince America that Heath Care reform and more specifically the Public Option are surely the beginnings of socialism and the “new” end of democracy and freedom of medical choice.

Don’t believe these people America. They think they are patriots, but they are nothing more than tools of the Insurance Industry (just as they were in 1994).

What makes you think that the majority of Americans think about it as you do? (um, the majority of REGULAR people?

Every major poll is trending that way. Every one.

Versus irregular people? Please explain the difference between the regular people and the irregular ones.)

I actually mean regular folks, the folks that work and struggle everyday vs. the pseudo-intellectual politicos that think they know better than the people themselves what the people need.

At any rate, I respectfully disagree that the majority of people believe as you do about the healthcare crisis

Well why hasn't a bill been passed then? Dems hold the majority in congress and the senate. If the majority of people are for the bill, what's the holdup?

http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/31/are-profits-on-tarp-funds-enough-feel-free-to-change/?scp=2&sq=tarp&st=cse

It’s funny how all the news about TARP at it’s inception was how horrible it was to use tax dollars to bail out Wall Street and how our money would be just pissed away. I do agree with the author of the article that we could have gotten an even better deal. Also, I can’t say I agreed with everything they did with the bailouts, but like Obama and McCain (and even Bush) I did believe at the time we had to do something – and TARP is what we came up with. Well, look at where we are now!!! About a year later and we are already getting paid back, and at a profit at that. That and the fact that most economic experts have said the banks are in a much better situation than they were back then. How is that even possible? Imagine that, a big government program that not only worked, it worked to our financial benefit.

Well, to be fair, this data is only from the few banks that have been allowed to repay their TARP funds. And while it's true these banks have made an impressive profit (4 billion, I think is what I read), the amount lent was way, way more than that......so to say the TARP program has made a profit is not really an accurate statement. Hopefully ALL the banks will go this route soon, though.

Where are all the Chicken Little’s now? The ones that said if we passed TARP and the other bailouts it would be the end of democracy as we know it? Oh wait, I think I see them... They are off of that soapbox now (because they were wrong), and now they are out just as vocally trying to convince America that Heath Care reform and more specifically the Public Option are surely the beginnings of socialism and the “new” end of democracy and freedom of medical choice.

Don’t believe these people America. They think they are patriots, but they are nothing more than tools of the Insurance Industry (just as they were in 1994).

IDK about all that, KartMan. There are a lot of skeevy things in the bill. Take for instance the proposal that the government would have access to your bank info (this is from CBS):

Democratic Health Care Bill Divulges IRS Tax Data - Taking Liberties - CBS News

Do you really think the government doesn't have access to your bank records? Just about everybody else does. Why would you worry that the government does? Bush made your telephone tappable. If the government needs that information for anything, trust me, they can get it.

kartman you said it so very well. Except for one thing, the naysayers, the "chicken little's" haven't shut up yet. As evidenced right here at LBT.

I reckon if the trend continues and every single penny is repaid, people will say that TARP had nothing to do with it. That it would have happened anyway as evidenced by, blah, blah, blah.

And the same goes for medical system reform. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. And everyone knows how stupid horses are.

Every poll, plain? How many polls compose EVERY SINGLE poll? You have that info at your fingertips I suppose. And you're quite sure that every single poll is showing that "regular" Americans think just what plain at LBT thinks? That goes a real long way in proving that you're right about proposed healthcare system changes.

Not. It doesn't prove anything except that perhaps the insurance industry's ability to sway Americans by clouding and issue and distributing misinformation might be having an influence on those people who have been polled. And we all know just exactly how accurate polls always are. Just like the exit polls after the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004.

Well, to be fair, this data is only from the few banks that have been allowed to repay their TARP funds. And while it's true these banks have made an impressive profit (4 billion, I think is what I read), the amount lent was way, way more than that......so to say the TARP program has made a profit is not really an accurate statement. Hopefully ALL the banks will go this route soon, though

I knew you might say that plain, the article points that out as well. TARP was a $hit sandwich and nobody really wanted it, but we had to do something or risk total collapse of our banking system. Our current Health Care system is poised to bankrupt us and is doomed for cataclysmic failure. I think everyone agrees it is in dire need of reform. My point in posting the article was to show you and the fellow naysayers of the current administration (and of government in general) that things don’t always turn out as horrible as the fear mongers want us to believe. Back when this thing was being implemented, people were saying the whole $700B would be wasted and the tax payers would never see it again. Well, not only are we starting to see a chunk of it being paid back, but we are actually turning a profit on some portions of it. Yes, some of it may take a long time to recover (AIG funds for example), but large portions of the program seem to be working. I guess what I’m saying is can you look at it as the “glass half full”? If you can do that, you might see that it just might be possible for the government to do something right with Health Care as well.

IDK about all that, KartMan. There are a lot of skeevy things in the bill. Take for instance the proposal that the government would have access to your bank info (this is from CBS):

Democratic Health Care Bill Divulges IRS Tax Data - Taking Liberties - CBS News

Seriously plain? C’mon, can’t you see this is another Red Herring just like “Death Panels” and “government bureaucrats getting between you and your doctor”?

Are you really afraid the IRS (which is part of the Federal Government BTW) might divulge your tax info to the Health Choices Commissioner (another part of the government)? Did you not see the news reports on the passport scandals this last election cycle? An employee of the INS (or NSA, I can’t remember which) illegally accessed several individuals’ passport records (including Obama’s, McCain’s and Hillary’s). The point is this; the “government” already has access to ALL of our private data. The government is made up of people like you and me, and some are not always as honest as we are (you’re an honest guy right:wink2:). Sometimes they can and do commit illegal acts with the access they have, that is a fact of life. The sad reality is that those things are going to happen regardless of whether or not we pass Health Care reform. What is important is that we have protections in place to identify those indiscretions when they happen, and to have severe penalties established for the perpetrators of those crimes.

The funny thing is that if these provisions were not in the Bill, the Right would be outraged that there were no protections against fraud or for means testing within the Bill. It smacks of hypocrisy - dammed if we do, dammed if we don’t.

I love you kartman.

Holy carp fishman! Breathe before somebody gets hurt!

I live in Ontario, which means I live under socialized medicine. It's ok, I'll say it, socialized... it's not too scary a word, however if you want to be all PC about it, the more appropriate term is "universal health care". Most Canadians are watching this insanity south of the border, and we sit scratching out heads over the matter with a :thumbup: look all over us. For us, it's like watching a very angry tennis match and we don't quite understand the rules.

It has it's down sides sometimes I admit, but I wouldn't give it up for the world. I don't have to worry that nobody will deny me treatment even if I am a complete disaster. That being said, I'm paying 100% for my lap band because I've opted not to go the gastric bypass route that Ontario will pick up the tab for, so I'm out $18K. You know what? I can deal with that as long as I'm not putting tax dollars to waste paying for somebody else's hot DD boob impants. Of course, if that particular person has lost one breast to cancer then I don't mind paying for one boob.

Our universal health care doesn't cover it all. I still pay through the nose for dental and I pay for drugs. If I stay in the hospital I pay daily for the TV in my room, and that ambulance ride isn't completely free. But the basics of life are covered... annual physical, ER, my father's hip replacement, and it's a comfort to have. Ok, sometimes I have to wait stupid times to get a service, and I admit that it sucks, but it's still better than not being able to afford to go see him at all.

Many articles written in our newspapers suggest that the Canadian model of health care may not be suitable for the US, not because the US could never make the Canadian model work, but because of that little thing called culture. Canadians and Americans just aren't the same. Nobody's better or worse, but we're just not the same and we have different views on some fundamental concepts of society. A big news story for you was Michelle Obama's shorts. A big news story for us was Prime Minister Jean Cretien strangling a heckler with his bare hands, but only because it was so damn funny.

There is an article which you all may be interested in:

The true measure of cross-border health - The Globe and Mail

I have nothing to gain no matter which side of the arguement wins. I am thinking though, that something has to be done in the US. It's a sad, sad thing that so many Americans living in Detroit are marrying their friends living in Ontario just so they can get health care... Wait, it does mean I gain something from the US situation being ironed out... MY taxes may go down.... yeah, in my maple syrup laden dreams.:mad:

Do you really think the government doesn't have access to your bank records? Just about everybody else does.

Just about everybody? And here I was thinking that the only federal liason to my financial info was the IRS. Who else has that kind of access? I'd like to know.

Why would you worry that the government does? Bush made your telephone tappable. If the government needs that information for anything, trust me, they can get it.

Ah, well it's a good thing that President Obama reversed that abuse of power....oh wait, he didn't. Doesn't that support my claim all along that once government is given a power that it never relinquishes that power? That what power you give Obama's administration today, you're giving a republican administration tomorrow?

I reckon if the trend continues and every single penny is repaid, people will say that TARP had nothing to do with it. That it would have happened anyway as evidenced by, blah, blah, blah.

I thought TARP was a crap sandwich when Bush choked and introduced it. I still don't think the theory was sound....BUT....I hope it pays off. It's too late for anything else, right?

Every poll, plain? How many polls compose EVERY SINGLE poll? You have that info at your fingertips I suppose. And you're quite sure that every single poll is showing that "regular" Americans think just what plain at LBT thinks?

Calm down BJean. If you'll go back and read, you'll see I wrote every major poll. There's only a few that I think even approach semi-validity. The way you have consistantly avoided any semblence at factual debate in this matter (preferring to attack me personally) tells me that you actually do see that the majority of Americans are going to scuttle this bill. And that pisses you off. Calm down, man. I don't agree with KartMan on most things, but at least he doesn't go off on some nonsensical, mouth-frothing tangent.

Not. It doesn't prove anything except that perhaps the insurance industry's ability to sway Americans by clouding and issue and distributing misinformation might be having an influence on those people who have been polled.

But here's where that particular line breaks down. I don't support the bill. And I'm not a minion of the insurance company. And I'm not some simpleton that swallows insurance propaganda. So why don't I support the bill? And isn't there at least a possibility that there are more people like me out there?

And we all know just exactly how accurate polls always are. Just like the exit polls after the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004.

You're right. Polls are often incorrect. They're particularly bad as predictors. However, as trending tools, they can yield some useful information. So, am I sure that, say, 55% of Americans oppose the bill? No. But when I look at past polls and see in the past, say, 20% of people opposed the bill, then the increase of opposition over time gives me an idea of how the country is trending.

I knew you might say that plain, the article points that out as well.

Sorry, I couldn't open it. My work firewall is fickle in what sites it lets me access.

My point in posting the article was to show you and the fellow naysayers of the current administration (and of government in general) that things don’t always turn out as horrible as the fear mongers want us to believe.

That's true, KartMan, but betting a trillion dollars or so isn't a gamble I'm comfortable with. Why not reform things piecemeal, or at least be very clear on how exactly this bill will cause much-needed reform.

If you can do that, you might see that it just might be possible for the government to do something right with Health Care as well.

Sure. I think it IS possible for the government to do something right. I'm not universally against Obama's administration reforming healthcare.....but I am against this particular bill (as are the majority of Americans). I'd be more than willing to listen to version 2.0

Seriously plain? C’mon, can’t you see this is another Red Herring just like “Death Panels” and “government bureaucrats getting between you and your doctor”?

Look, I agree that saying "there are death panels" is inaccurate. But, death panels could be the inadvertant result of the overburdening of medical resources.

Are you really afraid the IRS (which is part of the Federal Government BTW) might divulge your tax info to the Health Choices Commissioner (another part of the government)? Did you not see the news reports on the passport scandals this last election cycle? An employee of the INS (or NSA, I can’t remember which) illegally accessed several individuals’ passport records (including Obama’s, McCain’s and Hillary’s). The point is this; the “government” already has access to ALL of our private data. The government is made up of people like you and me, and some are not always as honest as we are (you’re an honest guy right:wink2:). Sometimes they can and do commit illegal acts with the access they have, that is a fact of life.

I agree totally and utterly. Which is why I strongly disagree with giving the government even more chances for its departmental workers to do the wrong thing. A 6ft chain has a chance of having a weak link. A 60ft chain has exponentially more chance of having a weak link.

And why the need to create a new department anyway? We're going to cut medicare, but establish a whole new department? Sounds skeevy (highly technical term).

The funny thing is that if these provisions were not in the Bill, the Right would be outraged that there were no protections against fraud or for means testing within the Bill. It smacks of hypocrisy - dammed if we do, dammed if we don’t.

Well, not really. There does need to be some protections against fraud, but establishing a whole new department isn't the sole means to do that. What smacks of hypocrisy to me is that no politician ever mentioned this in any townhall meeting. President Obama never mentioned that this new department would have access to people's bank records. Why? Because 1) they didn't themselves know, or 2) they knew the public wouldn't like it.

Edited September 2, 200917 yr by plain

Onikenbai: "That being said, I'm paying 100% for my lap band because I've opted not to go the gastric bypass route that Ontario will pick up the tab for, so I'm out $18K."

Here in the good ole' U.S., I paid over $20K out of pocket for my LB because my extremely expensive insurance plan refused to pay a dime of it. So you're out $18K and I'm out $20K and my assinine insurance premiums.

plain: "Look, I agree that saying "there are death panels" is inaccurate. But, death panels could be the inadvertant result of the overburdening of medical resources"

That kind of statement is making me froth at the mouth.

So I gotta run grab a paper towel before it runs down my shirt.

plain: "Look, I agree that saying "there are death panels" is inaccurate. But, death panels could be the inadvertant result of the overburdening of medical resources"

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you disagree with this statement. What I was trying to say is this: it has been estimated that some 70% or so of medicare costs are attributed to care going towards the older population. President Obama wants to cut medicare by some 200 billion dollars. Now....if you were needing to cut your budget, wouldn't you trim the money from the areas where you were spending the most? In the case of Medicare, the end result is the rationing of care for some. So call it want you want: Death panels, rationed care, the answer to too many birthdays, whatever. That's what I was really trying to say. I already conceded that the term "death panel" is inaccurate, so why all the froth?