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.

it cost every one of us about $1000/year to pay for the uninsured.

If you think that's alot, what's it going to cost us when we have to pay for everyone under his plan, not just the uninsured? Yes, your taxes and mine will have to cover it. Whose going to pay for it?

Those who can afford to purchase insurance now but choose not to would be required to pay for their own insurance.

Those who cannot afford to buy insurance would have more affordable options with a more affordable public option which would lower the costs of private insurance when they have to compete.

That's what I meant.

I don't understand how you could be in favor of making more people eligible for a government run (socialism) health care program but be against a public option for healthcare reform. It's the same thing because many who support a public option actually would have liked medicare to become available to everyone.

first of all, a government option for 5% of the people out there IS NOT SOCIALISM.

People, look up what socialism is. Please. Joe is also not a plumber.

I don't understand how you could be in favor of making more people eligible for a government run (socialism) health care program but be against a public option for healthcare reform. It's the same thing because many who support a public option actually would have liked medicare to become available to everyone.

Or Wilson/Palin with Cheney for Sec'y of Defense, Eric Cantor as Sec'y of technology, Boehner as chairman of the coppertone committee, Bobby Jindal heading up FEMA, and last but not least Michelle Bachman as CIA director. Late night tv would be worth watching again.

Or Mitt Romney could be elected and get 43 czars to advise him! Many without proper "vetting" from the FBI! Let's do it!

patty's just trying to get people stirred up and discussing Glen Beck. He doesn't deserve one iota of anyone's time. Far be it from me to criticize someone's reading matter. I'd think it would go a long way toward converting patty to the Democratic causes.

The Dems who have been obstructing progress are doing it simply because it gives them some power. In the end, they will vote the right way, and for the reason ya'll said. They want to get reelected.

When Bush was in office, yeah all he had to do was tell 'em what he wanted and they fell in line. It was a Republican dominated Congress, folks. Besides, no one wanted to be on Cheney's "F U" list.

The "You're Wrong" folks are crawling out of the woodwork and having a rally this weekend. We need to get out the fire hoses :-) Seriously though, it will be great to see who shows up so they can be easily identified. Think they're being encouraged to bring their guns. Even better. Maybe some of them will shoot off their pistolas and it'll be a good excuse for the gendarmes to return fire.

They're selling tee shirts like hotcakes. We need to raise some of our own money with "Wrong Way Wilson" shirts.

Seriously you all, why is anybody taking these clowns seriously? Btw, anyone notice how rough Sara Palin looks without her $100,000 wardrobe and her makeup and hair artists?

Oh. My. God. Way to keep it intellectual.

Give the American people some credit , will ya?

BJean doesn't understand what drives middle America, Patty. That's why she's scared.

Cigarette smoking is a choice. Those who do it, do it knowing full well the consequences. Banning products seldom works because it just creates an illegal market for the product. It's hard to be sympathetic to people who, through their reckless behavior, contribute

So, choice of smoking is ok, but choice of not having insurance is not? Hmmmmmm.....

The talking point from the Right in the last few days is all about whether or not Illegal Aliens will be covered the Health Care plan. The fact is that the bill specifically says that illegals are not covered. Here is what the HR Bill says

H.R. 3200: Sec 246 — NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS

Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.

Now that sounds pretty clear to me. The folks on the Right are now aware of this clause (I guess THEY finally read the bill), so now they are in an uproar that even though it says that, there is no clause for enforcement so the nasty illegals will still find a way to take advantage of our healthcare. You know something interesting? Somebody has thought of this “needy service” before. The House Oversight committee looked into several of these existing verification components and found that they spent $8.3 Million and caught a total of 8 illegal aliens. Hmmmm, $1M per illegal – sounds a little pricey but well worth it I’m sure:wink2:

Look, either the President needs to admit that illegals will be covered with a "don't ask, don't tell" citizenship requirement, or admit that, without coverage, the millions of illegals will still recieve their care in the ER's, negating much of the "savings" of this plan.

first of all, a government option for 5% of the people out there IS NOT SOCIALISM.

People, look up what socialism is. Please. Joe is also not a plumber.

Katklaws is back! I wondered where you were hiding!

So, choice of smoking is ok, but choice of not having insurance is not? Hmmmmmm.....

You don't get a choice when it comes to car insurance. You have to purchase it.

You can't get a mortgage without home owner's insurance. You have to have it.

I don't want to pay for the healthcare of those who can afford insurance but choose not to buy it.

If someone chooses to smoke, that doesn't affect me. And in those situations where their second hand smoke would - those have been controlled by laws forbidding workplace & restaurant smoking, etc..as it should be.

Those who can afford to purchase insurance now but choose not to would be required to pay for their own insurance.

Those who cannot afford to buy insurance would have more affordable options with a more affordable public option which would lower the costs of private insurance when they have to compete.

Under the bill, Americans who don't have ins. would be fined up to $3800., an "incentive" that the 'Candidate' Obama interestingly enough campaigned against.

If Ameicans had $3800. hanging around, they could afford to buy ins., but a good chunk of the uninsured have ins. but choose not to buy it. It also requires charging seniors 5X more for ins. than 20 year olds, even as their coverage would be rationed so the nation's health care dollars can be redirected to 20 year olds who will be forced to buy ins. they don't want to cover them for the medical care they don't need. :rolleyes:The rational of government!

So, choice of smoking is ok, but choice of not having insurance is not? Hmmmmmm.....

You don't get a choice when it comes to car insurance. You have to purchase it.

You can't get a mortgage without home owner's insurance. You have to have it.

Ah, but see....in those cases you DO have a choice. If you don't want to pay car insurance, don't drive. If you don't want to pay home owner's insurance, live in an apartment.

But how do you get around mandatory life insurance requirements, besides don't live?

Also, you may think that somebody else's smoking doesn't affect you, but it will. So will overeating. So will any "risky" behaviour, once the government steps into healthcare, in the form of increased taxes to pay for the medical conditions that all these things cause.

Ah, but see....in those cases you DO have a choice. If you don't want to pay car insurance, don't drive. If you don't want to pay home owner's insurance, live in an apartment.

But how do you get around mandatory life insurance requirements, besides don't live?

Those who choose not to have insurance and those whose habits make them sicker do cost the rest of us with higher healtcare costs. At least mandatory insurance is a step in the right direction. And yes, if you have a pulse, you should be required to have insurance. Unless you plan on never using any healthcare you can't totally pay for youself - and other than Bill Gates, who would that be?

Edited September 15, 200917 yr by Cleo's Mom

Those who choose not to have insurance and those whose habits make them sicker do cost the rest of us with higher healtcare costs. At least mandatory insurance is a step in the right direction. And yes, if you have a pulse, you should be required to have insurance. Unless you plan on never using any healthcare you can't totally pay for youself - and other than Bill Gates, who would that be?

Still, I don't like "mandatory". Seems vaguely un-American. Also, the bureaucrats could use that very argument to micromanage our lives. No smoking, drinking, recreational drugs, have an acceptable BMI, no unsafe sex, no speeding tickets / seatbelt violations........all these behaviors contribute towards society's "health costs" in some way. Yet I still don't believe it's government's place to step in and make these personal choices for us "for the good of society"

Look, either the President needs to admit that illegals will be covered with a "don't ask, don't tell" citizenship requirement, or admit that, without coverage, the millions of illegals will still recieve their care in the ER's, negating much of the "savings" of this plan.

Why does this bill have to be the enforcement vehicle for our Immigration Policy? I’m not saying I’m opposed to finding a way to ensure it doesn’t cover illegal aliens, I just don’t see it as that big a deal. To be frank, I would rather see them covered by the Public Option than via the emergency room anyway. We all agree that they can and do get service in the ER, we can also agree that service in the ER is the most expensive service there is… See my point?

Immigration policy is a separate issue and should be addressed in other legislation. Oh wait, it has been dealt with, it is already illegal after all. How about some enforcement of existing laws (especially by going after the source, the people that hire them)? I could go off on a separate tirade about that anyway…

- Who is the real criminal? The alien or the employer that hires them as cheap labor.

- Most aliens pay some sort of payroll tax

- They are doing work that we wont do because employers have cut wages so low that Americans wont do the work

Still, I don't like "mandatory". Seems vaguely un-American. Also, the bureaucrats could use that very argument to micromanage our lives. No smoking, drinking, recreational drugs, have an acceptable BMI, no unsafe sex, no speeding tickets / seatbelt violations........all these behaviors contribute towards society's "health costs" in some way. Yet I still don't believe it's government's place to step in and make these personal choices for us "for the good of society"

Lots of things are mandatory, and they are not un-American at all – it’s called being a responsible citizen. Driving the speed limit is mandatory, wearing a seatbelt is mandatory, entering the country with your passport is mandatory, taking your shoes off at the airport is mandatory, etc,etc. Many of the things you cited are already legislated in some states, others probably should be.

Sadly, if people are allowed to push the limits on these things then we all suffer for it. If a person chooses to not have insurance and they get sick and mount up thousands of dollars in medical bills, we all pay for it. All so that that person can have that “freedom” – that is wrong and bad for society, therefore THAT is un-American.

I don’t like paying for insurance, I rarely get sick. I can’t remember the last time I went to doctor (I was self pay on LapBand, so that doesn’t count). But I have insurance in case I do get sick, that’s the way insurance works. Car insurance is the same way. I have paid for car insurance since 1985 and I have never had a claim, yet I still pay because it is the right thing to do.

Why does this bill have to be the enforcement vehicle for our Immigration Policy? I’m not saying I’m opposed to finding a way to ensure it doesn’t cover illegal aliens, I just don’t see it as that big a deal. To be frank, I would rather see them covered by the Public Option than via the emergency room anyway. We all agree that they can and do get service in the ER, we can also agree that service in the ER is the most expensive service there is… See my point?

The healthcare bill should NOT be the vehicle for immigration reform / debate. However, it does play a part when we're discussing healthcare (I think it goes to both the cost and how the added number will affect our limited medical resources). Personally, (this is just my ideal, not saying it would work in the real world), I'd say go ahead and include the illegals already here (but be upfront about the costs) but then secure the border so that we can have some semblence of resource control. This goes for the Canadian border as well.....if our system is to be overburdened, let's at least give our citizens first shot.

My point was that the democrats are sidestepping the issue of illegals. President Obama made a big deal out of saying there are no provisions in the bill to cover illegals (not really the same as saying illegals won't be covered, but I digress...), but nobody mentions how they will recieve their care! I want the details, Prez!

Immigration policy is a separate issue and should be addressed in other legislation. Oh wait, it has been dealt with, it is already illegal after all. How about some enforcement of existing laws (especially by going after the source, the people that hire them)? I could go off on a separate tirade about that anyway

You're preaching to the choir here. I agree. Almost every new law is redundant and aimed at micromanaging out daily lives (granted, some laws dealing with changing technology need to be updated). And, while I'm a little up in the air over whether every illegal currently here should be deported (I think not....but certainly an illegal committing a crime should be a hasty one-way ticket back to Mexico), I agree that any businesses exploiting illegal labor should be fined....and perhaps criminal charges would be in order.

Lots of things are mandatory, and they are not un-American at all – it’s called being a responsible citizen. Driving the speed limit is mandatory, wearing a seatbelt is mandatory, entering the country with your passport is mandatory, taking your shoes off at the airport is mandatory, etc,etc. Many of the things you cited are already legislated in some states, others probably should be.

Again, none of those things are truly mandatory, if one chooses not to do those things listed above. I'm not so stupid as to think that there shouldn't be mandatory things (think registering for selective service, etc), it seems like the number of choices that we can make in our daily lives are dwindling fast. Now, depending on your political orientation, that may not seem like such a bad thing, but to me the concept is horrible.....I can think of few things worse than living in a country with cradle-to-grave government entitlements. Maybe the "mandatory" thing is a political divide? Maybe it's just me. I don't hear a lot of outrage over it.

Sadly, if people are allowed to push the limits on these things then we all suffer for it. If a person chooses to not have insurance and they get sick and mount up thousands of dollars in medical bills, we all pay for it. All so that that person can have that “freedom” – that is wrong and bad for society, therefore THAT is un-American.

Nope, I don't see it that way. America is all about the individual. I understand your point, but think that it is a very slippery slope. How 'bout when the government dictates everybody has to be a certain BMI because complications resulting from obesity start costing the country too much money? It just seems so.....wrong to me to be thinking in terms of the collective at the cost of the individual.

The healthcare bill should NOT be the vehicle for immigration reform / debate. However, it does play a part when we're discussing healthcare (I think it goes to both the cost and how the added number will affect our limited medical resources). Personally, (this is just my ideal, not saying it would work in the real world), I'd say go ahead and include the illegals already here (but be upfront about the costs) but then secure the border so that we can have some semblence of resource control. This goes for the Canadian border as well.....if our system is to be overburdened, let's at least give our citizens first shot.

My point was that the democrats are sidestepping the issue of illegals. President Obama made a big deal out of saying there are no provisions in the bill to cover illegals (not really the same as saying illegals won't be covered, but I digress...), but nobody mentions how they will recieve their care! I want the details, Prez!

And I was saying that it is a moot point, or a red herring because we are paying for it already by their visits to the ER. And yet what he said was very much the truth.

You're preaching to the choir here. I agree. Almost every new law is redundant and aimed at micromanaging out daily lives (granted, some laws dealing with changing technology need to be updated). And, while I'm a little up in the air over whether every illegal currently here should be deported (I think not....but certainly an illegal committing a crime should be a hasty one-way ticket back to Mexico), I agree that any businesses exploiting illegal labor should be fined....and perhaps criminal charges would be in order.

I’m sure you didn’t really mean that all the illegals are Mexican did you? Or did you mean that we should just deport all the illegals to Mexico? That reminds me of the great Stallone movie Demolition Man (ok, not so great), in which the best line of the movie is “in the future, all restaurants are Taco Bell”.

In regards to fining and punishing the businesses, that in my opinion is the only way to curb illegal immigration. People in the third world have a horrid existence. No threat of jail or deportation from here is going to keep them away from good paying jobs. The only way to stop it is to end the jobs. The only way to do that is to put the enforcement on the source of the income, the businesses that hire them.

Again, none of those things are truly mandatory, if one chooses not to do those things listed above. I'm not so stupid as to think that there shouldn't be mandatory things (think registering for selective service, etc), it seems like the number of choices that we can make in our daily lives are dwindling fast. Now, depending on your political orientation, that may not seem like such a bad thing, but to me the concept is horrible.....I can think of few things worse than living in a country with cradle-to-grave government entitlements. Maybe the "mandatory" thing is a political divide? Maybe it's just me. I don't hear a lot of outrage over it.

C’mon now that’s being a bit facetious isn’t it? Most of us drive and don’t rerally have the option not to. Many of us travel for work, so we have to use a passport, etc.

C’mon now that’s being a bit facetious isn’t it? Most of us drive and don’t rerally have the option not to. Many of us travel for work, so we have to use a passport, etc.

As far out as those examples are (and I agree that they are impractical), there still exists somewhat of an exit clause. If you don't want to get auto insurance, don't. If you don't want to get a passport, don't.

I guess this whole "mandatory insurance" thing is more of a personal rant, since I haven't heard anybody else complain about it. I'm content in leading the charge.

Still, I don't like "mandatory". Seems vaguely un-American. Also, the bureaucrats could use that very argument to micromanage our lives. No smoking, drinking, recreational drugs, have an acceptable BMI, no unsafe sex, no speeding tickets / seatbelt violations........all these behaviors contribute towards society's "health costs" in some way. Yet I still don't believe it's government's place to step in and make these personal choices for us "for the good of society"

Excellent point, plain. In this lies the whole controversy. Government control is getting out of control. When is too much government, too much. I believe it's now, and I'm not alone on this belief. The government is overstepping their boundaries. They have been for a long time. Gradually creeping into every freedom we have. Little by little eroding them away. AND making us slaves to all those we are in debt to by the trillions!!!! I can't understand how the liberals are okay with this. It boggles my mind.