obama trying to play nice again

[PiggyBank]

Quote from vhehn:

this is the problem that forced them to put in the mandate.

Or they could just do iwhat I said in my post, "gaming" the system won't fly with the insurers. Your implication that the mandate is necessary is false.

Let's face it, this is a bid for power. The Dems see an oppurtunity to paint the insurers as greedy and "unfair" for making money on a service they provide (and INVENTED), so they can takeover. Pelosi said not five minutes ago "the discrimination against Americans with pre-existing conditions must stop" implying that health insurance is a right for all Americans, which it isn't.

They should implement the interstate policies,and see what happens before they try to change the whole system. That is logical because it is the only way for that sector to continue to be profitable. Going straight to a govt run system is a power grab, that simple.

 

[HelloDollar]

Then go start an insurance company. Or invest in one existing. Like any other business opportunity, if there is indeed windfall profits from insuring health, hedge funds, investment bankers and the like will gladly fill the void. We've certainly seen such competition with auto insurance. The fact is a regular guy can get HMO coverage pretty darn cheap.

Quote from CaptainObvious:

Republicans get an F so far. I'd like to see the President ask for their resignations, effective immediatly, and here's why. What they're basicly saying is that we can't trust the government, so let me ask, just who is the government? And don't give me the "we the people" bullshit because we all know that ain't the case. THEY are the government. So if we cannot trust them to do the job they need to go, NOW.
The government has one primary job, which is to protect the citizens from enemies, both foreign and domestic. As it turns out, corporate America has become an enemy of the people. In this case, specific to heathcare, the enemy are the insurance companies. They have brought this on themselves. Since they have demonstrated that they are unwilling to run their business in an ethical manner the government needs to step in and regulate that business. It's too bad it has come to this, but again, they have no one but themselves to blame.
We no longer have capitalism in this country, we have the wholesale rape of the American consumer. I am very pro capitalism and this ain't it. I fully expect my elected representatives to protect me from these people, and if, by their own admission, thay cannot be trusted to do so, then good-bye. The president needs to lay down the law here, and in no uncertain terms, if you're not willing or able to do the job of an elected offical, then get the fuck out.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from Hello:

Since i hate bananas I probably could.... j/k, I am not taking a shot at you, as i think you are one of the few on this board who presents rational arguments without cheapshots, could you please clarify?

Well, I was thinking about the point you made, re that hungry billion, and began to wonder how they might be aided in feeding themselves. But I won't say more because I don't want a Honduran death squad after me.

 

[HelloDollar]

Quote from Ricter:

Could you live without bananas? I mean, would you be "ok' without bananas, or if bananas were very expensive?

An insurance co-op (the Utopian standard) is zero-sum. If America files 2 trillion in claims but is only willing to pay 1 trillion in premiums then someone (i.e. taxpayers) will need to eat the shortfall. And given that at this exact moment, a special Obama appointed 'task force" is convening to figure out a solution to the inevitability of Social Security and Medicare bankrupting us-despite around 17% of most peoples annual earnings being dedicated to those entitlements-it seems foolhardy to think that a public option is fiscally doable.

No matter how you slice it, those with preconditions, those who can't afford basic health coverage are asking for a government handout.

We keep hearing, "people are losing their homes because they're uninsured." So what? Is home ownership or a big bank account an entitlement? Here's a solution: Sell your friggin house, rent an apartment and pay for your own policy.

People lose their homes and savings due to joblessness or trading/business losses. Or even divorces and substance abuse. Why is a chronically ill person a supposed sacred cow? No OTHER money problem gets you relief.

There's winners and losers in life and it's not the governments role to be the arbiter. Unless, they want to arbitrate ALL of life's inequities.

 

[Hello]

Quote from Ricter:

Well, I was thinking about the point you made, re that hungry billion, and began to wonder how they might be aided in feeding themselves. But I won't say more because I don't want a Honduran death squad after me.

I will tell you what, i will give you this one, If Obama or any other politician has the balls to sacrifice the 500 billion+ a year we waste on military spending abroad, i would gladly say that they can take half that and spend 250 Bill on our people at home. The problem is that no politicians are willing to sack spending somewhere where it is unecessary to spend it somewhere where it is more necessary, and thus we face a situation where we just spend and spend and spend, I would actually cheer if Obama took our military budget cut it in half and spent 250 bill on healthcare but that does not seem to be an option, the option we face is just continued spendnig with no regard to where it will take us. I will reiterate i am vehemently opposed to spending money we dont have and taxing some groups for other peoples poor choices, but the military budget has got to go, and it is definately somewhere we could spend a lot more money at home.

 

[HelloDollar]

The further folly: The government is fighting tooth and nail to RE-INFLATE home prices while bitching about health care costs.

Which option strikes an a rational thinker as more egregious? A 500 square foot apartment renting for $1500 a month or a family health insurance policy costing $1500 a month? One is four crappy walls stacked 40 stories on top of each other-built at a cost of 50 grand, the other is open ended liability that with near certainty will require a six figure or more payout.

Higher insurance costs will theoretically "out bid" other ridiculous, less important expenditures. Perhaps a luxury condo should only cost $89,000, a movie ticket 3 bucks and health premiums 2k a month. ONLY THROUGH CRISIS do markets readjust. Here we have the government de facto saying, expensive housing=good, health care costs higher=bad, soaring teacher salaries=good, soaring medical practitioner salaries=bad. Who is the government to decide? I doubt there's a doctor in the world making Keith Olberman's salary from TARP junkie General Electric yet he's some self ordained compensation czar when it comes to MD's, bankers and insurance companies.

 

[Hello]

I honestly think they should come into congress with a bill that says overnight every single government salary is getting cut by 20%. If you look at the stats is it any wonder why "Average government salaries" have been going up just as "GDP per capita has gone down?" It doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out why this happens.

Quote from HelloDollar:

The further folly: The government is fighting tooth and nail to RE-INFLATE home prices while bitching about health care costs.

Which option strikes an a rational thinker as more egregious? A 500 square foot apartment renting for $1500 a month or a family health insurance policy costing $1500 a month? One is four crappy walls stacked 40 stories on top of each other-built at a cost of 50 grand, the other is open ended liability that with near certainty will require a six figure or more payout.

Higher insurance costs will theoretically "out bid" other ridiculous, less important expenditures. Perhaps a luxury condo should only cost $89,000, a movie ticket 3 bucks and health premiums 2k a month. ONLY THROUGH CRISIS do markets readjust. Here we have the government de facto saying, expensive housing=good, health care costs higher=bad, soaring teacher salaries=good, soaring medical practitioner salaries=bad. Who is the government to decide? I doubt there's a doctor in the world making Keith Olberman's salary from TARP junkie General Electric yet he's some self ordained compensation czar when it comes to MD's, bankers and insurance companies.

 

[bigarrow]

Quote from Hello:

Thank you for once again taking a shot at me for being willing to work for myself, now let me ask you soemthing. There is a billion people who will go to bed hungry tonight, is it not our obligation to feed all these people? If we raised the income tax rate to 90% and all of us lived in 300 square foot houses we could easily feed these people, why shouldnt we do this as well? It appears to me that food is a resource which is in much higher demand than healthcare, why are we not maknig this sacrifice to feed these people? At what point do yuo think people suffer from a lack of ambition to work based on tax rates? Have you ever taken an economics class? Do you not understand that at some point when the producers have to pay for everyone else the law of diminishing returns starts kicking in?

It wasn't much of a shot at you. You are the one bragging on yourself for working for yourself, big deal so do a lot of people and Hello let me tell you, we've all had hardships.
The topic is health care and insurance in America, focus. The system isn't working well. Obama and the democrats are working to fix the problem. That is what this is about. Insurance is a safety net, it's easy to understand.

 

[Hello]

I merely pointed ot that i worked hard for myself, its not like i tried to make myself into some self proclaimed hero, lots of people work hard and make money doing it, again i pose the question, why is insurance a safety net while food is not? IMHO if you want to play that game food should be the number 1 concern.

Quote from bigarrow:

It wasn't much of a shot at you. You are the one bragging on yourself for working for yourself, big deal so do a lot of people and Hello let me tell you, we've all had hardships.
The topic is health care and insurance in America, focus. The system isn't working well. Obama and the democrats are working to fix the problem. That is what this is about. Insurance is a safety net, it's easy to understand.

 

[PiggyBank]

Quote from HelloDollar:

The further folly: The government is fighting tooth and nail to RE-INFLATE home prices while bitching about health care costs.

Which option strikes an a rational thinker as more egregious? A 500 square foot apartment renting for $1500 a month or a family health insurance policy costing $1500 a month? One is four crappy walls stacked 40 stories on top of each other-built at a cost of 50 grand, the other is open ended liability that with near certainty will require a six figure or more payout.

Higher insurance costs will theoretically "out bid" other ridiculous, less important expenditures. Perhaps a luxury condo should only cost $89,000, a movie ticket 3 bucks and health premiums 2k a month. ONLY THROUGH CRISIS do markets readjust. Here we have the government de facto saying, expensive housing=good, health care costs higher=bad, soaring teacher salaries=good, soaring medical practitioner salaries=bad. Who is the government to decide? I doubt there's a doctor in the world making Keith Olberman's salary from TARP junkie General Electric yet he's some self ordained compensation czar when it comes to MD's, bankers and insurance companies.

+1 Excellent point(s), and impenetrable logic.

The govt is not in this just because they think they know better, but because they want control (socialism). Think about a truly universal health care system: can they tell you what u can eat and drink (in case its unhealthy), imagine if u smoke or your really fat, will they even cover u, cause you will be adding risk to the system. No one should be able to tell a FREE person what they can do with their OWN bodies, fuck that.