BS: Mass. Senatorial race

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 03:51 AM

ouch.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 07:49 AM

Well, tomorrow is the big day...

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: kendall
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 10:27 AM

I have nothing against profit. I do have something against profiteering.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 01:06 PM

"We would have to pay more than $12,000 a year for health insurance if we could afford it, and that would not include the co-pays and deductibles. The deductibles alone would be at least $1000 per year, and the co-pay would probably be at least 20%. "


For myself alone, I had $5,000 deductable with a monthly premium of $168. When I was unemployed ( over 2 years), and for 4 years as I commuted 1 1/2 to 4 1/2 hours ECHA way EACH day ( before getting a job with benefits). And I was uninsurable ( pre-existing conditions)

But that is why MD has one of the highest state tax rates around.



"Without access to health care we die."

Go to the emergency room. THEY will treat even you-

Or move somewhere with better benefits, or get a job with those benefit. You want the privilidge of staying where you are, and you want the rest of us to pay for your medical care. WHY should over 80% of the nation get MORE expensive costs and less coverage so that YOU can avoid paying what the rest of us pay???



"The taxpayers, on the other hand, have a right to set up insurance pools that will charge everyone the same amount regardless of age or infirmity. That is our right."

TRUE- so move to a state which has done so, or get YOUR state to do so. If the taxes are too high in those states, or the industry is moving out of them ( so there are no jobs), guess what? There is a reason for it.


"That is also what the propose legislation (so far - it isn't finished) will do. "

FALSE- Neither of the present bills under consideration, nor any proposed comprimises will do so. Rergardless of Obama's speeches.

TRY reading what you WILL get, instead of pretending it will be someimaginary pot of gold.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 01:52 PM

For myself alone, I had $5,000 deductable with a monthly premium of $168. When I was unemployed ( over 2 years), and for 4 years as I commuted 1 1/2 to 4 1/2 hours ECHA way EACH day ( before getting a job with benefits). And I was uninsurable ( pre-existing conditions)




BTW, if I selected only $1000 deductable with copays it would have been $ 475 per month for me alone. So it was comparable to what you claim is too high for you to afford.

Anyway, EVERY doctor I know will take patients without insurance- you just need to PAY for the services you receive. NOONE is keeping you from getting medical care: YOU have decided that YOU are not worth the cost it takes.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 01:55 PM

BTW, since I pay 1.45 cents on EVERY dollar I make to Medicare/Medicaid, I suspect I am paying a lot more towards the cost of medical care for the poor than those here telling me I am not.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 02:12 PM

If you had a chance to live in a modern and peaceful society with all the same conveniences you have now, yet you only had to pay about $1,000 a year in taxes for full medical coverage at no charge...would you move there?

Would you consider it?

Would you wonder how they managed to do that when your country can't seem to manage it?

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 02:20 PM

For myself alone, I had $5,000 deductable with a monthly premium of $168.

Hell, that's peanuts. Our monthly premium would be $1000 at a minimum, and most likely would be a lot more. We were paying $1000 a month premium several years ago and we are both older now, so our premiums would be higher. $5000 is too much for a deductible. With a deductible that high, people tend to put off getting care until providing such care becomes a lot more expensive.


When I was unemployed ( over 2 years), and for 4 years as I commuted 1 1/2 to 4 1/2 hours ECHA way EACH day ( before getting a job with benefits). And I was uninsurable ( pre-existing conditions)

So if you find yourself again at some time in the future being uninsurable because of pre-existing conditions, this health care reform would help you. By the way, both of us have pre-existing conditions, and we are as uninsurable as you were then.


But that is why MD has one of the highest state tax rates around.

Not sure I follow your reasoning there.


"Without access to health care we die."

Go to the emergency room. THEY will treat even you

No they won't. They might set a broken bone or rehydrate me if I have sever diarrhea, or stabilize me if I have a heart attack (if I don't die first), but they won't provide regular examinations to determine if I am at risk of heart attack, or provide me with chemotherapy if I get cancer, or even do regular cancer screenings to determine if I have cancer. If I require lengthy and expensive treatment for any kind of illness whatever, they will not provide that. You think you know a lot about what is available to people without insurance, but you no precisely zero.


Or move somewhere with better benefits, or get a job with those benefit. You want the privilidge of staying where you are, and you want the rest of us to pay for your medical care. WHY should over 80% of the nation get MORE expensive costs and less coverage so that YOU can avoid paying what the rest of us pay???

This is not possible. We don't live here because it's a privilege to live here. We live here because this is where we are able to live. If we had better options at this time, we would take them.


"That is also what the propose legislation (so far - it isn't finished) will do. "

FALSE- Neither of the present bills under consideration, nor any proposed comprimises will do so. Rergardless of Obama's speeches.

Prove it.


beardedbruce, who buys the goods and/or services that the company you work for provides?

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 02:26 PM

"
"That is also what the propose legislation (so far - it isn't finished) will do. "

FALSE- Neither of the present bills under consideration, nor any proposed comprimises will do so. Rergardless of Obama's speeches.

Prove it."


No, CarolC. YOU made a claim that is false- YOU get to prove it before you ask me to.




"beardedbruce, who buys the goods and/or services that the company you work for provides? "

Let me see... Telkom was Norwegian, Optus was Australian/New Zealand, Galex and Ibex were US, Various others were commercial birds for several nations. I know Al Jezeerha had several transponders on one...




Who buys the services that YOU provide, that you can only stay where YOU are?

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 02:32 PM

"So if you find yourself again at some time in the future being uninsurable because of pre-existing conditions, this health care reform would help you."

No. THAT is the point I am trying to make- THIS health reform would make it MORE expensive and harder for me to get coverage: I would have to spend money I do not have to get a lesser plan than I did before.

You can get ANY health care that you want- IF you pay for it- BUT WHY SHOULD I PAY FOR YOUR HEALTH CARE? If you are poor, and cannot afford it, go on Medicare ( which I already pay for) If you do not qualify for Medicare, YOU ARE NOT POOR ( according to the government you expect to pay your bills). Argue that the Medicare level is too low- I might agree with that- but to demand that everyone else ( 80% at least) pay more and get less so YOU get an advantage without paying for it is WRONG.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 02:40 PM

No, CarolC. YOU made a claim that is false- YOU get to prove it before you ask me to.

No, you are making a claim that is false, so that means that it is your responsibility to prove it.


"beardedbruce, who buys the goods and/or services that the company you work for provides? "

Let me see... Telkom was Norwegian, Optus was Australian/New Zealand, Galex and Ibex were US, Various others were commercial birds for several nations. I know Al Jezeerha had several transponders on one...

So this means that JtS and I are paying for your health care. Because the companies in the US that buy the goods and services that the company you work for provides are passing those costs on to the consumers, who then pass those costs on to other consumers in this country, which inflates the price of pretty much everything in this country. JtS and I are paying for your health care, while we don't have any health care ourselves.


Who buys the services that YOU provide, that you can only stay where YOU are?

Some marketing consultation firms buy the services we provide. In terms of employment, we can live anywhere in either North Carolina, South Carolina, or Georgia, because that is where the work is available for us. None of these states has the kind of health care programs you are talking about.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 02:42 PM

No. THAT is the point I am trying to make- THIS health reform would make it MORE expensive and harder for me to get coverage: I would have to spend money I do not have to get a lesser plan than I did before.

No it wouldn't. You wouldn't be able to get any insurance because you have a pre-existing condition. Remember?

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 02:55 PM

"Because the companies in the US that buy the goods and services that the company you work for provides are passing those costs on to the consumers, who then pass those costs on to other consumers in this country, which inflates the price of pretty much everything in this country. "


Yet YOU claim that the governemnt taxing the insurance companies will not increase costs???

Make up your mind as to what dreams you want to believe in. YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.

ANd I pay a lot more towards YOUR benitits than you pay towards mine- IF YOU DO NOT qualify for Medicaid, I have NO obligation to get you medical care- YOU can afford to pay for it, just as most of us do.

If YOU HAVE Medicaid, then I AM paying for your medical care, and all your arguements are invalid.

BTW, YOU made a statement that is unsupported, and known by those who read the present bills and the proposed changes to be false- YOU have to prove it true before calling for evidence that claims against YOUR statement are false ( without any evidence on your part.)

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: DougR
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 02:59 PM

Carol C: to find the kind of health care insurance you are looking for, you are going to have to move to a country that provides it. I know you have addressed the problem of moving, but as I see it, that's your solution. I seem to recall Little Hawk imploring you two to move to Canada and you replied that it is impossible, as I recall, to do that. Perhaps not. Make it happen. Even if the current bill passes (which at this point is a real possibility)you are not going to get he kind of coverage and cost you are looking for.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 03:00 PM

"No it wouldn't. You wouldn't be able to get any insurance because you have a pre-existing condition. Remember? "

No, CarolC. I live in MD- thus the long commute. MD has a program to cover those who are uninsurable. THAT isd why the taxes in MD are so high. If you want to move here, you would get coverage- upon paying the premiums ( see previous:

"BTW, if I selected only $1000 deductable with copays it would have been $ 475 per month for me alone. So it was comparable to what you claim is too high for you to afford.

Anyway, EVERY doctor I know will take patients without insurance- you just need to PAY for the services you receive. NOONE is keeping you from getting medical care: YOU have decided that YOU are not worth the cost it takes. "

)

You seem to think you can not pay for what you get: Either you pay yourself, or you pay in higher taxes. MY choice is to split the difference. NO ONE is keep[ing you from going to a doctor and paying out of pocket. It all depends on how much value you assign to your health.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 03:24 PM

You say go get a job that has benefits. What decade are you living in? Have you noticed the unemployment and under employment stats across the country?

My daughter Andie could not get medicare, because her condition when treated correctly helps a person live a somewhat normal life. She was not entitled.

But untreated, Addison's disease had left her so weak and ill, she could not physically cope with the only jobs she could get in the small town she lived (she had to live with her Dad due to illness), waiting tables, stocking shelves.

How was she supposed to get the treatment and meds she needed without first having money to pay for them?

BTW - she had $1,000s in debt from 5 previous emergency room visits and hospital observations in only 2 years which were worrying her no end. She could only pay $10 per month when she was able to work. She did not get a diagnosis until about 8 or 9 months before she passed away. Had that happened when she was first getting ill, her body would not have been reduced to such a weakened state. But how do you get a diagnosis, if doctors will only see you if you have insurance or can pay up front? Then you have to pay for tests, up front.

This Health bill - what has been "finally" proposed may not be ideal, but baby steps may get the US on the way to providing fair and adequate health care for all people regardless of their means.   Those who have more means can go private if they so wish, just as is done in the UK.

The problem in the US is that a certain several generations have been educated to believe that any attempts at socialistic anything, including health care is seen as too closely related to communism. We are also brought up to think we should take care of our own and so do not like being told by the government that we should look to other's needs.

I for one do not mind my taxes going to pay for decent health care for everyone. I don't care a wit whether or not we all contribute equally to the system.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 03:26 PM

Bruce... I cannot believe you actually think thru the implications of some of the claims and 'advice' you offer.

Not only that, people at places like the Congressional Budget Office, the AARP and various other concerned groups disagree with you as to what will 'cost more' and who will pay what.

A search leads to many, many claims about higher costs, but most are from those who simply have an interest in seeing Obama & the Democrats fail. They are frantic to regain power, and they YELL loudly...yell ANYTHING, whether based of fact or not, to discredit anything the Democrats try to do. I can only assume that many of them actually have convinced themselves that they have the high moral and economic ground, but the list of those who simply don't want THEIR stream of money diverted or dammed is long, indeed. Those cynically cover their own ass, and Devil take the hindmost.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 03:53 PM

"Because the companies in the US that buy the goods and services that the company you work for provides are passing those costs on to the consumers, who then pass those costs on to other consumers in this country, which inflates the price of pretty much everything in this country. "

Yet YOU claim that the governemnt taxing the insurance companies will not increase costs???

Make up your mind as to what dreams you want to believe in. YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.

First of all, I have not said that. What I have said is that you don't know what is in the final bill. You don't even know if taxing employer provided insurance is going to be in the final bill.


ANd I pay a lot more towards YOUR benitits than you pay towards mine- IF YOU DO NOT qualify for Medicaid, I have NO obligation to get you medical care- YOU can afford to pay for it, just as most of us do.

You aren't paying anything at all towards my benefits. Not one single red cent. I do not currently receive any benefits. None. Zip. Nada. No benefits for me. You do not pay any money at all towards anything that I currently receive. All of it comes from me and JtS. But I do pay for your health care. Which makes YOU a FREELOADER.


If YOU HAVE Medicaid, then I AM paying for your medical care, and all your arguements are invalid.

Think about it for just a minute, Mr. Rocket Scientist. If I had Medicaid, whould I be complaining that I don't have any access to health care? If your answer is 'yes', please go to the back of the class.


BTW, YOU made a statement that is unsupported, and known by those who read the present bills and the proposed changes to be false- YOU have to prove it true before calling for evidence that claims against YOUR statement are false ( without any evidence on your part.)

Bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 03:56 PM

Carol C: to find the kind of health care insurance you are looking for, you are going to have to move to a country that provides it. I know you have addressed the problem of moving, but as I see it, that's your solution. I seem to recall Little Hawk imploring you two to move to Canada and you replied that it is impossible, as I recall, to do that. Perhaps not. Make it happen. Even if the current bill passes (which at this point is a real possibility)you are not going to get he kind of coverage and cost you are looking for.

Ah yes... more of the "let them eat cake" solution to the problem of 45 thousand people dying every year because of a lack of access to health care.

You really can't see how utterly lacking in any kind of morality or conscience your arguments are, can you?    "If they can't move to another country, fuck them. They probably don't deserve to live anyway."

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:01 PM

CarolC,

Since you do not have medicaid, that means either youy choose to not have it or you do not qualify.

If you do not quyalify, there is no good reason not to have a large deductable policy like I had- to cover major expenses, since you make enough ( according to the government ) to cover the minor ones.

You can only blame yourself for no coverage.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:03 PM

"You can only blame yourself for no coverage."

quote: BS unquote.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:05 PM

BillD

"Those cynically cover their own ass, and Devil take the hindmost. "

As opposed to those high-minded Democrats who are selling votes and the public down the river?

When I see you make such comments about BOTH sides, I might listen. Until then, you are claiming that those you oppose are lying because you don't like what they say, and those you support have to be taken at their word even when the evidence ( and the written bill) is agaist them.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:08 PM

BillD

If you bother to read MY statement, I show that either she IS covered by medicare, or that she has chosen NOT to have coverage that the GOVERNMENT has determined she can afford.





"The Devil take the hindmost."

DIRECT quote from BillD

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:12 PM

"No it wouldn't. You wouldn't be able to get any insurance because you have a pre-existing condition. Remember? "

No, CarolC. I live in MD- thus the long commute. MD has a program to cover those who are uninsurable. THAT isd why the taxes in MD are so high. If you want to move here, you would get coverage- upon paying the premiums ( see previous:

Well, that's nice for you, beardedbruce, but commuting from Maryland to Georgia is not an option for us. And we can't afford the real estate prices or cost of rent in Maryland, either. We need to live in a place where we can afford the basic necessities like shelter.


"BTW, if I selected only $1000 deductable with copays it would have been $ 475 per month for me alone. So it was comparable to what you claim is too high for you to afford.

So you were not well served by your insurance company. All the more reason to have comprehensive health care reform.


Anyway, EVERY doctor I know will take patients without insurance- you just need to PAY for the services you receive. NOONE is keeping you from getting medical care: YOU have decided that YOU are not worth the cost it takes.

Yes, this is true. But if we don't have enough money to pay for insurance, we sure as hell don't have enough money to pay for all of our health care needs out of pocket. What we can afford, we get and we pay for (which is precious little at this time). What we can't afford, we go without. This means I have not had a comprehensive medical examination, or anything more than the most cursory health screening in several years, and I don't see myself being able to get one any time in the near future.


You seem to think you can not pay for what you get: Either you pay yourself, or you pay in higher taxes. MY choice is to split the difference. NO ONE is keep[ing you from going to a doctor and paying out of pocket. It all depends on how much value you assign to your health.

You don't know that you would have to pay higher taxes for the final bill, because you don't know what's going to be in the final bill. However, I would definitely pay higher taxes for health care, because even those higher taxes would cost me a hell of a lot less than what I would have to pay in order to get insurance under the current system. It's entirely untrue that doctors will always provide care to people who don't have insurance. Doctors will absolutely not provide care unless you pay at the time services are provided. If you can't do that, you are out of luck. So we are only able to get what care we have the money for at any given time. And doctors usually charge more for services to people who don't have insurance, so that makes it even more difficult for people like JtS and me to get care by paying out of pocket. That's another way JtS and I are subsidizing your health care. Because doctors charge us more for services than they do you.


You are not paying for the care you get, beyond your premiums, deductibles, and co-pays. For everything else, other people are paying for your health care. Those other people are the people who pay more for goods and services so your employer can provide you with insurance, and the other people in your insurance pool whose premiums go to pay for your health care.   If you had to pay for all of your care out of pocket, even you, the amazing beardedbruce, would not be able to afford it.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:16 PM

Since you do not have medicaid, that means either youy choose to not have it or you do not qualify.

If you do not quyalify, there is no good reason not to have a large deductable policy like I had- to cover major expenses, since you make enough ( according to the government ) to cover the minor ones.

Beardedbruce, even the large deductible policies are beyond our reach because of our pre-existing conditions.   Believe me, I have looked into it. If we could afford even a high deductible policy WE WOULD ALREADY HAVE ONE! Please, grow a brain cell or two, ok?

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:25 PM

"And we can't afford the real estate prices or cost of rent in Maryland, either. We need to live in a place where we can afford the basic necessities like shelter."

BUT YOY SAY
"However, I would definitely pay higher taxes for health care, because even those higher taxes would cost me a hell of a lot less than what I would have to pay in order to get insurance under the current system"

The costs of rent and real estate are due in part to those taxes you are so eager to pay.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:28 PM

CarolC,

In MD they would be at the rates I indicated, even for you ( See MHIP). YOU are saying you can't move, so the rest of the world should pay more.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:30 PM

" All the more reason to have comprehensive health care reform.
"

Which this set of bills IS NOT.


I agree it would be nice for us all to have lemonade fountains and rock candy mountains- but why do you think THIS BILL will create it?

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:37 PM

"And we can't afford the real estate prices or cost of rent in Maryland, either. We need to live in a place where we can afford the basic necessities like shelter."

BUT YOY SAY
"However, I would definitely pay higher taxes for health care, because even those higher taxes would cost me a hell of a lot less than what I would have to pay in order to get insurance under the current system"

The costs of rent and real estate are due in part to those taxes you are so eager to pay.

The cost of real estate has nothing whatever to do with taxes. You pay the price of the real estate plus the taxes. The real estate prices in Maryland are higher by orders of magnitude than the real estate prices in the area where we live. I know, because most of my family lives in that area.

And the amount of increase I would have to pay in taxes would still be a lot less than the amount we would have to pay to get access to health care. Although it still hasn't been established that this is what will happen if we get a health care reform bill passed.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:42 PM

In MD they would be at the rates I indicated, even for you ( See MHIP). YOU are saying you can't move, so the rest of the world should pay more.

No, beardedbruce, the rest of the world is paying less (at least the rest of the developed world), because they either have single payer not for profit health care, or their insurance industries are very tightly regulated.

So you are saying that since I am unable to move to Maryland, I should just die. How high do you think your taxes would go up there where you are in Maryland if all of the 50 million uninsured people in the US moved there so they could get access to your health care system? Do you really think that's a workable alternative?

And it still hasn't been established that you would have to pay more if a health care reform bill gets passed. You are just making stuff up as you go along.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:48 PM

" All the more reason to have comprehensive health care reform.
"

Which this set of bills IS NOT.


I agree it would be nice for us all to have lemonade fountains and rock candy mountains- but why do you think THIS BILL will create it?

There you go again comparing an essential for life to frivolous non-essentials. Like I said, "let them eat cake - I've got mine so fuck everyone else".

No, none of the bills so far offered is comprehensive health care reform. But if they were, you would oppose them even more strenuously than you are the various bills that you keep referencing, because they would either involve single payer not for profit, or a very tightly regulated insurance industry. But we don't know yet what the final bill will contain, so we really can't say exactly what's going to be in it, but all of them are an improvement over what we have now, because they do provide some regulation of the insurance industry.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: John P
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 05:04 PM

For those of you who are opposed to changing the way health care is paid for in this country because it's taking money out of your pocket and giving it to others: How do you feel about Social Security, the police and fire departments, Congress, and the U.S. Army? All of these take money from everyone in order to supply us with things we need. I, for one, would much rather have universal health care than our military.

As soon as we allowed our corporations to send most of our good jobs out of the country, we needed health care reform. Before that, most people who wanted a job could get one that included insurance. That's no longer the case.

The Republican party has become the party of "no". If you don't like the health care bill, please tell us your alternative. Please make it one that doesn't involve thousands of our fellow citizens dying while their neighbors don't die of the same illness. "Get a job" or "Move" are asinine suggestions. Do you have anything real to offer?

If you don't like the health care compromise that they are getting ready to stick us with, get on the phone to your Republican congresspeople and encourage them to get out of the way. They've been blocking the door way too long.

As for whether or not Obama is a liberal -- all the liberals I know consider him to be slightly right of center, like almost all Democrats. The Republicans who have pandered to their base enough to get elected are so far to the right they are off the scale. The differences between Democrats and Republicans are just different degrees of corporocracy.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 05:24 PM

Bruce...Carol has asked in detail the questions which boil down to: "Is there any **practical** way to follow your advice."

I am reminded of Will Rogers who, during WWII, replied to a question about how to deal the German submarines by saying, "It's simple...boil the oceans!"

"...you are claiming that those you oppose are lying because you don't like what they say.." You know I did not say that. I 'implied' that SOME of them are directly lying, while others seem to have convinced themselves that the liars are right.

(And why should *I* be the one to "...make such comments about BOTH sides, "? You go first.)

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 05:25 PM

I don't think Obama's a liberal...he just gives a vague sort of impression of being liberal, but he doesn't pursue liberal policies. Nor does the Democratic Party. They are to the right of center.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 05:30 PM

"I agree it would be nice for us all to have lemonade fountains and rock candy mountains"

There you go again comparing an essential for life to frivolous non-essentials. Like I said, "let them eat cake - I've got mine so fuck everyone else".

And I have to say that your doing it here in this thread is particularly obscene considering that you are doing it in sight of a mother whose child died because she didn't have access to health care. Really, you should be very ashamed of yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:13 PM

"Although it still hasn't been established that this is what will happen if we get a health care reform bill passed.



EXACTLY!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:15 PM

"How high do you think your taxes would go up there where you are in Maryland if all of the 50 million uninsured people in the US moved there so they could get access to your health care system? Do you really think that's a workable alternative?
"


YET yopu seem to think if they are put on the FEDERAL tax roles the impact will be reasonable???

If they ALL moved here, they would ALL pay the MD taxes. Which, with the cost of the polocies, covers the cost of the insurance.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:16 PM

"So you are saying that since I am unable to move to Maryland, I should just die."

No, YOU are now the one putting words into other's mouths.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:18 PM

"none of the bills so far offered is comprehensive health care reform. But if they were, you would oppose them even more strenuously than you are the various bills that you keep referencing,"

Wrong again. YOU do not speak for what I would or would not support.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: Riginslinger
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:20 PM

One thing for sure, it looks like the Senate race in Massachusetts is all about health care.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:21 PM

"And I have to say that your doing it here in this thread is particularly obscene considering that you are doing it in sight of a mother whose child died because she didn't have access to health care. Really, you should be very ashamed of yourself. "

And when the bill passes, and children still die, will YOU be very ashamed that you supported a bill that lowers the level of care while increasing the cost?


Shame, shame , shame on YOU.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:25 PM

"For those of you who are opposed to changing the way health care is paid for in this country because it's taking money out of your pocket and giving it to others"

Well, since I am NOT in the group you refernce- I am against THIS healthcare reform because I think it will do more harm than good, and the effort by liberals to gain control over so much ( at such a cost) is something to be fought.

I guess you can't acknowledge that there may be those opposed to something for any other reason than what YOU decide.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:40 PM

People are constantly ascribing the darkest and most horrible of motives toward other people for disagreeing with them on some issue. I see that happening all the time, on every side of various political debates.

It's misleading. Generally speaking, everyone takes the position they do on an issue because they think they are defending the public interest, standing up against corruption, fighting for freedom and justice and fairness, etc...

They all have good intentions on some level. They just have differing notions about how to achieve the good that they desire.

This is also true of people who go to war...all the way from an American serviceman to an Al Qaeda suicide bomber. They all believe they're defending something valuable and fighting for what's right.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: DougR
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 07:55 PM

Every cridible poll that I know of shows that the majority of the American people do not want the bill currently being considered by the Democrats to become law. Now it's conceivable that the majority is wrong, however, I would think reasonable people might consider the possibility that they are.

DougR

And Carol, cut out the crap accusing folks here of wanting people to die. No one on the forum wants that and it does not strengthen your argument.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: John P
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 08:06 PM

BB -- Since I didn't name you with my comments, it's a bit odd that you assume I was talking about you. Since I was very specific about who I was talking about, saying that I can't accept any other reason for being against the health care bills is a specious comment. Be that as it may, here's a couple of quotes by you from earlier in the thread that certainly make it sound like you don't like the thought of being asked to pay your share of national health care:

"BTW, since I pay 1.45 cents on EVERY dollar I make to Medicare/Medicaid, I suspect I am paying a lot more towards the cost of medical care for the poor than those here telling me I am not."

"You can get ANY health care that you want- IF you pay for it- BUT WHY SHOULD I PAY FOR YOUR HEALTH CARE?"

I repeat my question, since you decided to answer it with a non-answer: why should anyone pay for any group endeavor? Why should I pay for weapons of war? Why should I pay crooked congresspeople? Why should I pay for schools, since I don't have any kids? Why SHOULDN'T you pay for other peoples' health care? We all pay for all sorts of things for each other. Most of us call it civilization.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: Riginslinger
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 08:54 PM

"They all have good intentions on some level."

            I suppose, if you can include the Adam Smith kind of folks who maintain that looking out for their own best interest will benefit everyone in the long run. There are a number of less fortunate beings who will perish in the short run, but...

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 09:04 PM

Doug...

"Every cridible poll that I know of shows that the majority of the American people do not want the bill currently being considered by the Democrats to become law."

That is NOT what the polls have shown. That is a distortion of what the polls have shown for months. The majority of American people wanted the versions of the bill that they started with...before the Republicans demanded it be gutted, and when it WAS gutted, they refused to vote for what they got!
Sure, the polls show that the majority are unhappy with the state of the current bill....but that is NOT the same as saying they "...do not want the bill...to become law." Polls are interesting. They can ask the question in such a way as to make ANY answer agree with certain viewpoints. Really "credible" polls reflect the underlying truth of what people are thinking, not what 'sound byte' they are promoting.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: GUEST,999
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 09:09 PM

I can't be arsed to read all of this thread. IMO, what Haiti needs is NOT politicos of any stripe/bent in Haiti right now. What Haiti needs are people trained in emergency work: SAR, crowd control, foods distribution, doctors and dentists; people trained to assess the situation, not there for a photo op. So where this or that politician was when there's shit goin' down that requires work--not opinions--is what so many of you call 'straw dogs'--a term I dislike very much.

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 10:34 PM

Douggie-boy DISTORT something? Unbelievable!

Now maintaining that

1. He can lie out of both sides of his mouth at once

or

2. He's a moron since he actually BELIEVES the crap he comes out with

has a lot more credibility

Subject: RE: BS: Mass. Senatorial race
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Jan 10 - 02:03 AM

"Although it still hasn't been established that this is what will happen if we get a health care reform bill passed."

EXACTLY!!!!

It's nice to see that you agree that it has not been established that our taxes will increase if a health care reform bill is passed.


"How high do you think your taxes would go up there where you are in Maryland if all of the 50 million uninsured people in the US moved there so they could get access to your health care system? Do you really think that's a workable alternative"

YET yopu seem to think if they are put on the FEDERAL tax roles the impact will be reasonable???

First of all, you are the one suggesting that taxes will go up if health care reform is passed. I don't agree with this premise. However, let's use a hypothetical. If you have 50 million people who are currently uninsurable, it is either because they too poor to pay for private insurance, or they are older or have pre-existing conditions. All of which makes them more expensive as a group than the overall population, which also includes a lot of young healthy people.

Spreading the cost over the whole population of hundreds of millions of people means each person pays a lot less than if the cost of that group of 50 million uninsurables was spread over the current population of the state of Maryland, which is only a few million people (a little over five and a half million total, but only a fraction of those are taxpayers, since some are children, people on disabilities, or retired). So yes, in such a scenario, taxes would go up a lot less for everyone if everyone was paying for it than if only the people in the state of Maryland were paying for it.

It's just basic economics, beardedbruce. Economy of scale.