# Its A Sad Day In America



## Xenon (Nov 15, 2002)

On 1/20/2009 I decided to put apart my partisanship and have an open mind. On 3/23/2010 I realized that was a mistake.


----------



## marco (Jan 2, 2003)

mike, i dont understand lol huh


----------



## Xenon (Nov 15, 2002)

marco said:


> mike, i dont understand lol huh


I wouldn't expect you too.


----------



## xeloR (Jan 2, 2009)




----------



## Us And Them (Dec 4, 2008)

Im assuming he didn't live up to every aspect of that speech did he ?


----------



## Ibanez247 (Nov 9, 2006)

Jon87 said:


> Im assuming he didn't live up to every aspect of that speech did he ?


Whens the last time any politician did? Kill em all!


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

Alright!! It finally passed! Where do I go to get my free health care? Oh, right. I'm a citizen of this country and I work for a living, which means now I have to pay for my own and for some scumbag illegal mexican's too. Don't worry illegal dude, go pork your wife and pop out a few more anchor babies. I gotcha covered.


----------



## Xenon (Nov 15, 2002)

Piranha Dan said:


> Alright!! It finally passed! Where do I go to get my free health care? Oh, right. I'm a citizen of this country and I work for a living, which means now I have to pay for my own and for some scumbag illegal mexican's too. Don't worry illegal dude, go pork your wife and pop out a few more anchor babies. I gotcha covered.


Im going to work extra hard today for that!


----------



## EZmoney (May 13, 2004)

Xenon said:


> On 1/20/2009 I decided to put apart my *partisanship* and have an *open mind*. On 3/23/2010 I realized that was a mistake.


Your 2 mistakes are:

1. Realizing that it was a mistake to have an open mind - you don't have to agree with other POVs but it is always good to at least consider/recognize them.

and

2. Believing that one political party is better than another - they both suck huge balls and fall short of their promises.


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

so the one major thing that he hasnt done from that video... in one year and two months of being in office... is not open meetings up to the public? i mean, all politicians have double standards

that lobbiests thing was done by the supreme court.... which he had no control over. 
i mean, all politicians err from things.... none as bad as our last president:

<A href=


----------



## joey'd (Oct 26, 2005)

as the concept of capitalism is on a steady downward trend and demolishing the economy, more and more people should be open minded to a socialist republic.

i consider this a step in a positive direction and wish the american people would get on board and realize the way the government has been slowly taking away citizens rights over the past 3 decades with the many bills being passed to further put the common people at a disadvantage.









further more, the concept of communism has been greatly propagandized to an extreme, directed by the american government as if the people did see that it does make sense, it would take away power from those who hold it, thus giving the people a choice in how the country they live in is run.

its a shame that this tactic is being used for that purpose and those who fall for it are only furthering the demise of the american people.



Piranha Dan said:


> Alright!! It finally passed! Where do I go to get my free health care? Oh, right. I'm a citizen of this country and I work for a living, which means now I have to pay for my own and for some scumbag illegal mexican's too. Don't worry illegal dude, go pork your wife and pop out a few more anchor babies. I gotcha covered.


gee i wonder how amny loopholes the private insurance companies will find to deny any medical claims for you and your family if we kept the health system we have been under for years now.


----------



## NeXuS (Aug 16, 2006)

joey said:


> Alright!! It finally passed! Where do I go to get my free health care? Oh, right. I'm a citizen of this country and I work for a living, which means now I have to pay for my own and for some scumbag illegal mexican's too. Don't worry illegal dude, go pork your wife and pop out a few more anchor babies. I gotcha covered.


gee i wonder how amny loopholes the private insurance companies will find to deny any medical claims for you and your family if we kept the health system we have been under for years now.
[/quote]







totally agree with ya


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

Piranha Dan said:


> Alright!! It finally passed! Where do I go to get my free health care? Oh, right. I'm a citizen of this country and I work for a living, which means now I have to pay for my own and for some scumbag illegal mexican's too. Don't worry illegal dude, go pork your wife and pop out a few more anchor babies. I gotcha covered.


typing this post made you feel real smart ill bet.


----------



## Da' Manster! (Sep 1, 2009)

Piranha Dan said:


> Alright!! It finally passed! Where do I go to get my free health care? Oh, right. I'm a citizen of this country and I work for a living, which means now I have to pay for my own and for some scumbag illegal mexican's too. Don't worry illegal dude, go pork your wife and pop out a few more anchor babies. I gotcha covered.


Well, you can thank President Bush for that!..He was the one who let all the illegals into California during his administration and gave them jobs and employment!...and who's been governor of California for the last seven years since 2003?!...yup, Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger!...You know what they say about people that live in glass houses...


----------



## Kyle2154 (May 12, 2006)

I realize we have a heavily democratic site, however, at any expense I totally disagree with this bill.

Under this theology shouldn't we make sure every man woman and child is guaranteed car insurance? life insurance? home insurance? all liberties should be for all, correct?


----------



## Da' Manster! (Sep 1, 2009)

Hi Xenon,

Hey, I'm a registered Democrat as well but I tend to be MODERATE...and I sincerely mean that...not just lip service...I am neither liberal, nor ultra conservative...I am in the middle but lean towards the left. There are issues/stances on both sides which I agree and disagree vehemently with...Anyhow, here is a joke that I posted on my joke thread a while back..just in case you missed it....it's an instant classic, more fact than fiction, and funny as hell, IMHO!

==========================================================================

A woman in a hot air balloon realized she was lost. She lowered her altitude and spotted a man in a boat below. She shouted to him,

"Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don't know where I am."

The man consulted his portable GPS and replied, "You're in a hot air balloon, approximately 30 feet above ground elevation of 2,346 feet above sea level. You are at 31 degrees, 14.97 minutes north latitude and 100 degrees, 49.09 minutes west longitude.

"She rolled her eyes and said, "You must be an Obama Democrat."

"I am,"replied the man. "How did you know?"

"Well," answered the balloonist, "everything you told me is technically correct. But I have no idea what to do with your information, and I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help to me."

The man smiled and responded, "You must be a Republican."

"I am," replied the balloonist. "How did you know?"

"Well," said the man, "you don't know where you are or where you are going. You've risen to where you are due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise you have no idea how to keep, and you expect me to solve your problem. You're in exactly the same position you were in before we met, but somehow, now it's my fault."


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

Kyle2154 said:


> I realize we have a heavily democratic site, however, at any expense I totally disagree with this bill.
> 
> Under this theology shouldn't we make sure every man woman and child is guaranteed car insurance? life insurance? home insurance? all liberties should be for all, correct?


you dont see the difference between car insurance and health insurance?

and actually, i dont think its heavily democratic... there is a lot of republicans on here, or at least conservative thinking people (not to say they are mutually inclusive, just to make an example). i like these threads because i am surrounded by not very many republicans so i like hearing their stances on stuff.


----------



## Da' Manster! (Sep 1, 2009)

Nick G said:


> I realize we have a heavily democratic site, however, at any expense I totally disagree with this bill.
> 
> Under this theology shouldn't we make sure every man woman and child is guaranteed car insurance? life insurance? home insurance? all liberties should be for all, correct?


you dont see the difference between car insurance and health insurance?

and actually, i dont think its heavily democratic... there is a lot of republicans on here, or at least conservative thinking people (not to say they are mutually inclusive, just to make an example). i like these threads because i am surrounded by not very many republicans so i like hearing their stances on stuff.
[/quote]

Hi Nick,
I think he meant in our Congress, not on these messageboards!...









OOOPS!..Nevermind!...He did mean this website...At first, I misread the post as "I realize we have a heavily democratic SIDE but I now see that was indeed SITE!...my mistake...


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

It looks like any other day in America to me, maybe a step in the right direction, that's about all.

Both sides are blowing this completely out of proportion, IMO.

Democrats are touting this as some sort of a historical legislature that puts us on the level of every other industrialized first world country. Well, no, not really. We still don't have universal health care, as 15 million Americans will remain uncovered. Little is being done to control the provider costs. 32 million customers are being mandated to purchase PRIVATE insurance plans - no wonder the stocks went up yesterday and keep going up today. I would've preferred a single payer, or at least a public option. Oh well. There are good things in the bill - companies won't be able to deny coverage based on preexisting conditions, 32 million more will be covered, children will be able to stay on their parents insurance till they're 27. Doughnut loophole in Medicare drug prescription coverage will be closed. Insurers will no longer be able to rescind policies when a person becomes ill. Many other nice things, so again - a nice first step, but not enough.

Nothing is more hilarious than the hysterical reaction of the Republican minority trying to paint this as some sort of an evil Communist takeover. Hmm, let's see - the stock market is going up after the bill is passed, what does that tell ya ? Why wouldn't it - the private insurers are not only being kept in business but they're getting 32 million new clients, courtesy of the bill. American Medical Association has endorsed the bill. There is no public option, no Medicare for all, not even an attempt to build a two-tier private/public systems that countries like Germany and Australia enjoy, both of which rank ahead of United States in WHO's ranking of health care systems. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that this bill will REDUCE the deficit. Quite simple, the righties are upset because they suffered a monumental legislative defeat, and it's a case of wounded egos.

Watch - 5 or 6 years from now, Republicans will be trying to take credit for the reform - of course, after they've expanded it and passed Medicare Part Z









P.S. In 2002, Republican Congress passed Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Coverage, estimated to cost around $750 billion, financed on the Chinese credit card. President Bush signed it into law. Where was the outcry from teabaggers ? Where were the tears from Glenn Beck then ?


----------



## Uncle Jesse (Feb 18, 2007)

I work 40 hours a week, but my company doesn't offer health care. I can get my own, but it will cost too much. Now I do the best I can and try to avoid things where I could get hurt. But what happens when one day I am hit by a car while walking down the street. The guy takes off and 2 days later I wake up in the hospital paralyzed from the neck down. How am I gonna pay my bill? How will I pay for the special needs I have? The answer is I'm not. I can't. So you will pay it.

That's how it is now. I don't get how people think it would be worse if everyone has health care.

Maybe I'm wrong? Please feel free to enlighten me.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Foodstamp said:


> I work 40 hours a week, but my company doesn't offer health care. I can get my own, but it will cost too much. Now I do the best I can and try to avoid things where I could get hurt. But what happens when one day I am hit by a car while walking down the street. The guy takes off and 2 days later I wake up in the hospital paralyzed from the neck down. How am I gonna pay my bill? How will I pay for the special needs I have? The answer is I'm not. I can't. So you will pay it.
> 
> That's how it is now. I don't get how people think it would be worse if everyone has health care.
> 
> Maybe I'm wrong? Please feel free to enlighten me.


COMMUNIST !!!!!

j/k

You will probably benefit from the bill.

WaPost has a simple interactive tool to see how the bill will effect you

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/speci...-means-for-you/


----------



## Kyle2154 (May 12, 2006)

I don't know all of the ins and outs of the bill. I am in charge of the finance department of a medium sized company (500 employees). There is no way I can offer everyone health insurance, and the quotes I have received from places where I have tried to do so is usually around $300-$500 per individual, $1400-$1800 for families, a month.

There is no way an employee of mine wants to fork over that kind of cash to pay for their own insurance so they don't.

Our company makes money, good money, $15 mil gross a year, and we net out a healthy 5% in cold hard owner profit.

Having said all of that, if this little protion I have read about having to insure every employee or pay a $2,000 penalty per employee means 100% what I think it means, we will, without question be royally screwed.

$2,000 x 500 = $1,000,000, are you freaking kidding me? Yeah, we will make money still, but it will be cutting everyone from $9 an hour to a tip-plus wage of probably $4.25.

They would all, without question, rather make $9 + tips than $4.50 + tips and not have insurance, but that's no longer going to be up to us is it?


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2010)

It's interesting that people seem to blame Obama, but aren't there "checks and balances" in place so that the president can't really make those big changes quickly?



Kyle2154 said:


> I don't know all of the ins and outs of the bill. I am in charge of the finance department of a medium sized company (500 employees). There is no way I can offer everyone health insurance, and the quotes I have received from places where I have tried to do so is usually around $300-$500 per individual, $1400-$1800 for families, a month.
> 
> There is no way an employee of mine wants to fork over that kind of cash to pay for their own insurance so they don't.
> 
> ...


Maybe your company should stop being a bunch of greedy fucks?


----------



## Kyle2154 (May 12, 2006)

Mr. Lahey said:


> I don't know all of the ins and outs of the bill. I am in charge of the finance department of a medium sized company (500 employees). There is no way I can offer everyone health insurance, and the quotes I have received from places where I have tried to do so is usually around $300-$500 per individual, $1400-$1800 for families, a month.
> 
> There is no way an employee of mine wants to fork over that kind of cash to pay for their own insurance so they don't.
> 
> ...


Maybe your company should stop being a bunch of greedy fucks?
[/quote]

News flash, idiot, 5% profit isn't egregious.

The decent wages we do pay would be in jeopardy if this means a $1,000,000 extra expense a year is all I'm saying.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Mr. Lahey said:


> I don't know all of the ins and outs of the bill. I am in charge of the finance department of a medium sized company (500 employees). There is no way I can offer everyone health insurance, and the quotes I have received from places where I have tried to do so is usually around $300-$500 per individual, $1400-$1800 for families, a month.
> 
> There is no way an employee of mine wants to fork over that kind of cash to pay for their own insurance so they don't.
> 
> ...


Maybe your company should stop being a bunch of greedy fucks?
[/quote]

It's Congress, not Obama who worked out the bill.

I found what Kyle was talking about on CNN's summary of the bill. That provision doesn't kick in till 2014.



> Companies with 50 or more employees must offer coverage to employees or pay a $2,000 penalty per employee after their first 30 if at least one of their employees receives a tax credit. Waiting periods before insurance takes effect is limited to 90 days. Employers who offer coverage but whose employees receive tax credits will pay $3,000 for each worker receiving a tax credit.


I think it's a concern but I believe that the idea is that, through other incentives in the bill, by that time the cost of insurance will be a lot more affordable. Even today, it's a hell of a lot less than paying $2,000 fine



> the quotes I have received from places where I have tried to do so is usually around $300-$500 per individual, $1400-$1800 for families, a month.





> $2,000 x 500 = $1,000,000, are you freaking kidding me? Yeah, we will make money still, but it will be cutting everyone from $9 an hour to a tip-plus wage of probably $4.25.


Well, yeah, why would you pay the $2,000 fine if it'd be cheaper to insure everyone ? Like I said, by 2014, it should be even more affordable.


----------



## Kyle2154 (May 12, 2006)

Jewelz, I disagree, even our shittiest atena coverages are around $115 a month. And we're talking about really bad coverage. At that, that's almost $1,400, not significantly improved from $2k.

This coverage is so bad it's more like a discount, than an insurance anyways.

I don't see adequate insurance for someone coming in lower than $150 a month, even in 2014.


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2010)

I don't get it Kyle. You said it would cost:



> I can offer everyone health insurance, and the quotes I have received from places where I have tried to do so is usually around $300-$500 per individual, $1400-$1800 for families, a month.


But then you used the penalty fee, for all the employees, as your base.

Why wouldn't you just pay the $300-1800?


----------



## Kyle2154 (May 12, 2006)

Mr. Lahey said:


> I don't get it Kyle. You said it would cost:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


$300 to $1800 a month man. That's like $4k to $20k a year.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Kyle2154 said:


> Jewelz, I disagree, even our shittiest atena coverages are around $115 a month. And we're talking about really bad coverage. At that, that's almost $1,400, not significantly improved from $2k.
> 
> This coverage is so bad it's more like a discount, than an insurance anyways.
> 
> I don't see adequate insurance for someone coming in lower than $150 a month, even in 2014.


OK, well, here is something I pulled from Washington Post that talks about the new insurance "exchange" that this plan will create by 2014. The idea of an exchange is to bring more private competition to each market.

http://live.washingtonpost.com/health-cares-impact.html



> It is quite possible that insurers will keep rising rates in the next couple years in response to the new requirements they will face, but there are some measures in the bill that could actually push the other way, limiting the increases.
> 
> For one thing, starting next year insurers will have to disclose just how much of the money they take in in premium dollars is spent out for medical claims as opposed to being used for profit or overhead. And they will have to spend at least 80 percent of the premium dollar on medical claims in the individual insurance market, and *85 percent of it in the employer-based insurance market*.
> 
> Those ratios are higher than what some insurers spend now on medical claims, so that could limit rate increases somewhat. Then there is the basic fact of competition -- *while many markets today have very few insurers in them, the whole idea of the new 'exchange' that will start in 2014 is that there will be many more insurers competing for customers. If insurers come into that market with rates that are exorbitantly high, they may lose out to lower-priced competitors.* But no one can know for sure what will happen. One thing to keep in mind: most of the insurance regulations in the bill have to do with the individual and "small group" insurance market.


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2010)

Oh the penalty fee is per year? So you would pay $2000/person a year?

That's hardly a penalty fee, definitely a huge cost savings on that one. Doesn't seem right. How would any company afford those kinds of added costs?


----------



## Kyle2154 (May 12, 2006)

Jewelz, even if I concede that the rates will come down, and even if I concede they will come down 50%, what does it matter? If it costs $400 a month now, and $200 then, that's still $2,400 per employee.

Hell, even if I concede they will come down 75%, that's $1,400 still per employee. We are still talking about a huge spanking.


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2010)

I wonder how this differs from Canada - from what I know about our system, we get basic coverage from tax dollars and extra coverage from our employers. So the cost for the employer I would assume is much, much lower.


----------



## Kyle2154 (May 12, 2006)

I'm just saying if I went to an employee and said "Hey, yeah! I'll cover you, but I'm going to have to cut your wage by $2" they would think I was insulting them, probably try to form a union and quit.

Ironically, those same guys are cheering this bill, not knowing that effectively in the long run, it may be the same exact outcome. Only we aren't talking about the effects sprawling across my little company, we're talking about the whole damn country.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Kyle2154 said:


> Jewelz, even if I concede that the rates will come down, and even if I concede they will come down 50%, what does it matter? If it costs $400 a month now, and $200 then, that's still $2,400 per employee.
> 
> Hell, even if I concede they will come down 75%, that's $1,400 still per employee. We are still talking about a huge spanking.


I agree that it's a concern, which is one of the reasons why I wish the bill included a public option which is essentially a non-profit plan administered by the government.

The House did pass a bill that included a public option but it stalled in the Senate - there are about 54-55 Senators that supported it, which was not enough for a filibuster-proof majority. This is something I'm still hoping could be amended in the future.

Having said that, HC reform or not, I think your company should make an investment to insure your employees. You gross $15 mill a year, wouldn't it be advantageous to take steps to make sure that when one of your employees gets cancer or gets into an accident, that they're taken care of and they don't go bankrupt from paying their medical bills ? I know I am very grateful that my employer provides me with these benefits. I can't imagine that there are many companies that are bigger than 100 employees who don't.


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

Mr. Lahey said:


> It's interesting that *people seem to blame Obama,* but aren't there "checks and balances" in place so that the president can't really make those big changes quickly?


cus its easy to blame him, and make pictures of him as hitler.

yeah, the thing i been thinking is that... obama got voted into office on a campaign calling for health care reform. this is that reform, yeah, its not pretty and i agree with jewelz in that... this isnt as major as its being made out to be... but at the same time, this is what we voted him in to do. the republicans are trying to do things to derail it because they dont agree with it, and yeah, democrats would do the same. 
but hey, this is america, the greatest country in the world. this is our system. obama isnt the only person making moves here.


----------



## Kyle2154 (May 12, 2006)

Jewelz said:


> Jewelz, even if I concede that the rates will come down, and even if I concede they will come down 50%, what does it matter? If it costs $400 a month now, and $200 then, that's still $2,400 per employee.
> 
> Hell, even if I concede they will come down 75%, that's $1,400 still per employee. We are still talking about a huge spanking.


I agree that it's a concern, which is one of the reasons why I wish the bill included a public option which is essentially a non-profit plan administered by the government.

The House did pass a bill that included a public option but it stalled in the Senate - there are about 54-55 Senators that supported it, which was not enough for a filibuster-proof majority. This is something I'm still hoping could be amended in the future.

Having said that, HC reform or not, I think your company should make an investment to insure your employees. You gross $15 mill a year, wouldn't it be advantageous to take steps to make sure that when one of your employees gets cancer or gets into an accident, that they're taken care of and they don't go bankrupt from paying their medical bills ? I know I am very grateful that my employer provides me with these benefits. I can't imagine that there are many companies that are bigger than 100 employees who don't.
[/quote]

I would love to make that investment, and I meet with insurance companies all the time. We just have the same problem as every company, am I really going to sign on the dotted line for a $400 x 500 x 12 expense a year? We'd be out of business.

Now the government is going to force our hand? What if all 500 of us don't have a job at all now, is that better?


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Kyle2154 said:


> Jewelz, even if I concede that the rates will come down, and even if I concede they will come down 50%, what does it matter? If it costs $400 a month now, and $200 then, that's still $2,400 per employee.
> 
> Hell, even if I concede they will come down 75%, that's $1,400 still per employee. We are still talking about a huge spanking.


I agree that it's a concern, which is one of the reasons why I wish the bill included a public option which is essentially a non-profit plan administered by the government.

The House did pass a bill that included a public option but it stalled in the Senate - there are about 54-55 Senators that supported it, which was not enough for a filibuster-proof majority. This is something I'm still hoping could be amended in the future.

Having said that, HC reform or not, I think your company should make an investment to insure your employees. You gross $15 mill a year, wouldn't it be advantageous to take steps to make sure that when one of your employees gets cancer or gets into an accident, that they're taken care of and they don't go bankrupt from paying their medical bills ? I know I am very grateful that my employer provides me with these benefits. I can't imagine that there are many companies that are bigger than 100 employees who don't.
[/quote]

I would love to make that investment, and I meet with insurance companies all the time. We just have the same problem as every company, am I really going to sign on the dotted line for a $400 x 500 x 12 expense a year? We'd be out of business.

Now the government is going to force our hand? What if all 500 of us don't have a job at all now, is that better?
[/quote]

Why would you be out of business ? You said you gross $15 mill.

$400 x 500 x 12 = 2,400,000

15,000,000 > 2,400,000.

How is grossing over $12.5 mill equate to going out of business ?

Like I said, by 2014 it should be cheaper.

Plenty of other companies are doing it today.


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

Jewelz said:


> Jewelz, even if I concede that the rates will come down, and even if I concede they will come down 50%, what does it matter? If it costs $400 a month now, and $200 then, that's still $2,400 per employee.
> 
> Hell, even if I concede they will come down 75%, that's $1,400 still per employee. We are still talking about a huge spanking.


I agree that it's a concern, which is one of the reasons why I wish the bill included a public option which is essentially a non-profit plan administered by the government.

The House did pass a bill that included a public option but it stalled in the Senate - there are about 54-55 Senators that supported it, which was not enough for a filibuster-proof majority. This is something I'm still hoping could be amended in the future.

Having said that, HC reform or not, I think your company should make an investment to insure your employees. You gross $15 mill a year, wouldn't it be advantageous to take steps to make sure that when one of your employees gets cancer or gets into an accident, that they're taken care of and they don't go bankrupt from paying their medical bills ? I know I am very grateful that my employer provides me with these benefits. I can't imagine that there are many companies that are bigger than 100 employees who don't.
[/quote]

I would love to make that investment, and I meet with insurance companies all the time. We just have the same problem as every company, am I really going to sign on the dotted line for a $400 x 500 x 12 expense a year? We'd be out of business.

Now the government is going to force our hand? What if all 500 of us don't have a job at all now, is that better?
[/quote]

Why would you be out of business ? You said you gross $15 mill.

$400 x 500 x 12 = 2,400,000

15,000,000 > 2,400,000.

How is grossing over $12.5 mill equate to going out of business ?

Like I said, by 2014 it should be cheaper.

Plenty of other companies are doing it today.
[/quote]

Well for one, "gross" is different from "net". For all we know, after costs, the company may only make $1. Anyways, I'm trying to keep an open mind about this bill even though I'm against it. I do like the little aspects like those affecting pre-existing conditions, dropping coverage for the ill etc but I think this went way too fast. It must say something if not one single republican vote for it. I'm for overhauling our medical situation but feel there could be something better. I think its better to make the right choice rather then change just for change sake.


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2010)

diddye said:


> Jewelz, even if I concede that the rates will come down, and even if I concede they will come down 50%, what does it matter? If it costs $400 a month now, and $200 then, that's still $2,400 per employee.
> 
> Hell, even if I concede they will come down 75%, that's $1,400 still per employee. We are still talking about a huge spanking.


I agree that it's a concern, which is one of the reasons why I wish the bill included a public option which is essentially a non-profit plan administered by the government.

The House did pass a bill that included a public option but it stalled in the Senate - there are about 54-55 Senators that supported it, which was not enough for a filibuster-proof majority. This is something I'm still hoping could be amended in the future.

Having said that, HC reform or not, I think your company should make an investment to insure your employees. You gross $15 mill a year, wouldn't it be advantageous to take steps to make sure that when one of your employees gets cancer or gets into an accident, that they're taken care of and they don't go bankrupt from paying their medical bills ? I know I am very grateful that my employer provides me with these benefits. I can't imagine that there are many companies that are bigger than 100 employees who don't.
[/quote]

I would love to make that investment, and I meet with insurance companies all the time. We just have the same problem as every company, am I really going to sign on the dotted line for a $400 x 500 x 12 expense a year? We'd be out of business.

Now the government is going to force our hand? What if all 500 of us don't have a job at all now, is that better?
[/quote]

Why would you be out of business ? You said you gross $15 mill.

$400 x 500 x 12 = 2,400,000

15,000,000 > 2,400,000.

How is grossing over $12.5 mill equate to going out of business ?

Like I said, by 2014 it should be cheaper.

Plenty of other companies are doing it today.
[/quote]

Well for one, "gross" is different from "net". For all we know, after costs, the company may only make $1. Anyways, I'm trying to keep an open mind about this bill even though I'm against it. I do like the little aspects like those affecting pre-existing conditions, dropping coverage for the ill etc but I think this went way too fast. *It must say something if not one single republican vote for it*. I'm for overhauling our medical situation but feel there could be something better. I think its better to make the right choice rather then change just for change sake.
[/quote]

Aren't the Republicans known for their party-voting tactics? As in, we all vote the same way?


----------



## ZOSICK (May 25, 2005)

I would think most tax payers over the age of 18 would have gotten use to the idea of government run transfer funds by now, social security has been law for how many years now?


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

Mr. Lahey said:


> Jewelz, even if I concede that the rates will come down, and even if I concede they will come down 50%, what does it matter? If it costs $400 a month now, and $200 then, that's still $2,400 per employee.
> 
> Hell, even if I concede they will come down 75%, that's $1,400 still per employee. We are still talking about a huge spanking.


I agree that it's a concern, which is one of the reasons why I wish the bill included a public option which is essentially a non-profit plan administered by the government.

The House did pass a bill that included a public option but it stalled in the Senate - there are about 54-55 Senators that supported it, which was not enough for a filibuster-proof majority. This is something I'm still hoping could be amended in the future.

Having said that, HC reform or not, I think your company should make an investment to insure your employees. You gross $15 mill a year, wouldn't it be advantageous to take steps to make sure that when one of your employees gets cancer or gets into an accident, that they're taken care of and they don't go bankrupt from paying their medical bills ? I know I am very grateful that my employer provides me with these benefits. I can't imagine that there are many companies that are bigger than 100 employees who don't.
[/quote]

I would love to make that investment, and I meet with insurance companies all the time. We just have the same problem as every company, am I really going to sign on the dotted line for a $400 x 500 x 12 expense a year? We'd be out of business.

Now the government is going to force our hand? What if all 500 of us don't have a job at all now, is that better?
[/quote]

Why would you be out of business ? You said you gross $15 mill.

$400 x 500 x 12 = 2,400,000

15,000,000 > 2,400,000.

How is grossing over $12.5 mill equate to going out of business ?

Like I said, by 2014 it should be cheaper.

Plenty of other companies are doing it today.
[/quote]

Well for one, "gross" is different from "net". For all we know, after costs, the company may only make $1. Anyways, I'm trying to keep an open mind about this bill even though I'm against it. I do like the little aspects like those affecting pre-existing conditions, dropping coverage for the ill etc but I think this went way too fast. *It must say something if not one single republican vote for it*. I'm for overhauling our medical situation but feel there could be something better. I think its better to make the right choice rather then change just for change sake.
[/quote]

Aren't the Republicans known for their party-voting tactics? As in, we all vote the same way?
[/quote]

How is that limited to the republican party? You phrased that as if the democrats don't vote the same way. Its not called "politics" for no reason. I have a hard time believing gov't will be good at running such a large program if we consider how they run the DMV, medicare, social sec, military spending, etc. Hell, look at how badly states like California are run.


----------



## greenmonkey51 (Aug 16, 2004)

This is going to flounder in the supreme court anyways. You're now forcing people to buy a good from a private company. Along with threatening the sovereignty of many states. 14 states have already filed lawsuits against the feds, and there will likely be more.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

diddye said:


> Jewelz, even if I concede that the rates will come down, and even if I concede they will come down 50%, what does it matter? If it costs $400 a month now, and $200 then, that's still $2,400 per employee.
> 
> Hell, even if I concede they will come down 75%, that's $1,400 still per employee. We are still talking about a huge spanking.


I agree that it's a concern, which is one of the reasons why I wish the bill included a public option which is essentially a non-profit plan administered by the government.

The House did pass a bill that included a public option but it stalled in the Senate - there are about 54-55 Senators that supported it, which was not enough for a filibuster-proof majority. This is something I'm still hoping could be amended in the future.

Having said that, HC reform or not, I think your company should make an investment to insure your employees. You gross $15 mill a year, wouldn't it be advantageous to take steps to make sure that when one of your employees gets cancer or gets into an accident, that they're taken care of and they don't go bankrupt from paying their medical bills ? I know I am very grateful that my employer provides me with these benefits. I can't imagine that there are many companies that are bigger than 100 employees who don't.
[/quote]

I would love to make that investment, and I meet with insurance companies all the time. We just have the same problem as every company, am I really going to sign on the dotted line for a $400 x 500 x 12 expense a year? We'd be out of business.

Now the government is going to force our hand? What if all 500 of us don't have a job at all now, is that better?
[/quote]

Why would you be out of business ? You said you gross $15 mill.

$400 x 500 x 12 = 2,400,000

15,000,000 > 2,400,000.

How is grossing over $12.5 mill equate to going out of business ?

Like I said, by 2014 it should be cheaper.

Plenty of other companies are doing it today.
[/quote]

Well for one, "gross" is different from "net". For all we know, after costs, the company may only make $1. Anyways, I'm trying to keep an open mind about this bill even though I'm against it. I do like the little aspects like those affecting pre-existing conditions, dropping coverage for the ill etc but I think this went way too fast. It must say something if not one single republican vote for it. I'm for overhauling our medical situation but feel there could be something better. I think its better to make the right choice rather then change just for change sake.
[/quote]

IMO, Republicans didn't play along because of politics. Senator DeMint's comment about how this could be the President's Waterloo comes to mind.

Yes, I agree that the bill could have been much better. But I do think it's a step in the right direction, and some of the changes that go into effect immediately will be popular. Maybe in another 50 years, we'll actually pass something that resembles *Universal *health care.


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

Even though I'm against it, I am happy for democrats and Obama. He set out to do something while he was running and finally got something done. It took over a year but at least he has something you can tie to his administration. Let just hope his next task isn't immigration. NO AMNESTY!


----------



## Soul Assassin (Nov 21, 2006)

take a look...

http://www.youtube.com/user/schiffreport?b.../45/LfGjqmG47cU

http://www.youtube.com/user/schiffreport?b.../27/E0KTFHNU7Ag


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

^^^ so according to that guy, if i get sick, it should be ok for my health insurance to drop me because the way health insurance works is healthy people pay and the company makes profits.


----------



## joey'd (Oct 26, 2005)

Mr. Lahey said:


> I wonder how this differs from Canada - from what I know about our system, *we get basic coverage from tax dollars* and extra coverage from our employers. So the cost for the employer I would assume is much, much lower.


that is how it differs we pay it in taxes.
the extra coverage i get from my employer i pay for monthly, but i dont pay much, so i would have to assume that the company pays partial.
it costs me $35 a month on top of the billions in tax i pay annually


----------



## Wide_Eyed_Wanderer (Aug 22, 2006)

Sooo you guys have a new healthcare system or something?


----------



## TheWayThingsR (Jan 4, 2007)

Heh, just read this.

"On this day in 1919 Benito Mussolini founded his Fascist political movement in Milan, Italy. On this day in 1933 The German Reichstag adopted the Enabling Act, which effectively granted Adolf Hitler dictatorial legislative powers. And on this day in 2010 President Barack Obama signed a massive, nearly $1 trillion health care overhaul. I hope it turns out better then the first two."


----------



## diddye (Feb 22, 2004)

Nick G said:


> ^^^ so according to that guy, if i get sick, it should be ok for my health insurance to drop me because the way health insurance works is healthy people pay and the company makes profits.


Well....if what he's saying is true, people don't need to buy insurance b/c the penalty is only $95. However, monthly premiums for law abiding citizens can be in the hundreds of dollars. Then, people don't need to buy insurance UNTIL they get sick then they're taken care of by this socialized medicine. Ultimately, the insurance company will lose millions of paying members and this whole thing falls apart. The gov't better jack up the penalty otherwise people will abuse that loophole. BTW nick, he never does address if its ok for providers to drop sick people...he simply described the current situation and how f'ed up the new one is.


----------



## greenmonkey51 (Aug 16, 2004)

Nick G said:


> ^^^ so according to that guy, if i get sick, it should be ok for my health insurance to drop me because the way health insurance works is healthy people pay and the company makes profits.


So there are no other ways to fix this other than spending 1 trillion dollars that we don't have.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

Jewelz said:


> Jewelz, even if I concede that the rates will come down, and even if I concede they will come down 50%, what does it matter? If it costs $400 a month now, and $200 then, that's still $2,400 per employee.
> 
> Hell, even if I concede they will come down 75%, that's $1,400 still per employee. We are still talking about a huge spanking.


I agree that it's a concern, which is one of the reasons why I wish the bill included a public option which is essentially a non-profit plan administered by the government.

The House did pass a bill that included a public option but it stalled in the Senate - there are about 54-55 Senators that supported it, which was not enough for a filibuster-proof majority. This is something I'm still hoping could be amended in the future.

Having said that, HC reform or not, I think your company should make an investment to insure your employees. You gross $15 mill a year, wouldn't it be advantageous to take steps to make sure that when one of your employees gets cancer or gets into an accident, that they're taken care of and they don't go bankrupt from paying their medical bills ? I know I am very grateful that my employer provides me with these benefits. I can't imagine that there are many companies that are bigger than 100 employees who don't.
[/quote]

I would love to make that investment, and I meet with insurance companies all the time. We just have the same problem as every company, am I really going to sign on the dotted line for a $400 x 500 x 12 expense a year? We'd be out of business.

Now the government is going to force our hand? What if all 500 of us don't have a job at all now, is that better?
[/quote]

Why would you be out of business ? You said you gross $15 mill.

$400 x 500 x 12 = 2,400,000

15,000,000 > 2,400,000.

How is grossing over $12.5 mill equate to going out of business ?

Like I said, by 2014 it should be cheaper.

Plenty of other companies are doing it today.
[/quote]

Well for one, "gross" is different from "net". For all we know, after costs, the company may only make $1. Anyways, I'm trying to keep an open mind about this bill even though I'm against it. I do like the little aspects like those affecting pre-existing conditions, dropping coverage for the ill etc but I think this went way too fast. It must say something if not one single republican vote for it. I'm for overhauling our medical situation but feel there could be something better. I think its better to make the right choice rather then change just for change sake.
[/quote]

IMO, Republicans didn't play along because of politics. Senator DeMint's comment about how this could be the President's Waterloo comes to mind.

Yes, I agree that the bill could have been much better. But I do think it's a step in the right direction, and some of the changes that go into effect immediately will be popular. Maybe in another 50 years, we'll actually pass something that resembles *Universal *health care.
[/quote]

we will because we will have to. or else the life expectancy for people who make over 100k a year will be drastically higher than the life expectancy for those impovershed who dont "deserve" health care.


----------



## maddyfish (Sep 16, 2006)

Where are rich Canadians gonna go now for their healthcare?

Personally I am hopeful for the future. This travesty will be a call to arms to remove many congressmen and then repeal this thing.

And yes, I do think you should pay for your own healthcare, and I should not pay for your healthcare. If you can't pay and die, ok thats fine. Call it Darwin in action.


----------



## Guest (Mar 24, 2010)

^My father's life was saved by our Universal Healthcare. Do you think he deserved to just die simply because I and my siblings wouldn't have been able to pay his bills even with help from his company and his savings?


----------



## Soul Assassin (Nov 21, 2006)

diddye said:


> ^^^ so according to that guy, if i get sick, it should be ok for my health insurance to drop me because the way health insurance works is healthy people pay and the company makes profits.


Well....if what he's saying is true, people don't need to buy insurance b/c the penalty is only $95. However, monthly premiums for law abiding citizens can be in the hundreds of dollars. Then, people don't need to buy insurance UNTIL they get sick then they're taken care of by this socialized medicine. Ultimately, the insurance company will lose millions of paying members and this whole thing falls apart. The gov't better jack up the penalty otherwise people will abuse that loophole. BTW nick, he never does address if its ok for providers to drop sick people...he simply described the current situation and how f'ed up the new one is.
[/quote]

Take into consideration that the vids are about 3-4 months old, they probably amended the sh*t out of it by now. Either way Americans are doomed, your public debt is $12.4 Trillion and another $60 Trillion for all your unfunded liabilites like; Social Security, Medicare, Medicate and off-balance sheet wars. It's mathematically imposible to pay it off. Therefore, the neoliberals and neoconservatives elites that rule over you will default via hyperinfaltion...this will crush the poor, the middle-class and retirees. Hate to be the harbinger of bad news but it's reality, IMHO. Another thing, Republicans + Democrats = the same thing.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

yes, he also feels that fire departments contribute to a socialist marxist agenda, and that everyone should hunt and tend their land like people did hundreds of years ago...a very simplistic way of looking at things...which is the major argument you'll get from those opposed...der her, i dun wanna pay fer someone elses shyt...der her...

little do they realize, for the amount society pays for universal PREVENTATIVE medicine, they'll see a savings in the long run of massive proportion...medicine which will prevent heart disease, diabetes...etc...they oppose these things and chalk it up to personal responsibility, rather than DO something about it, they just let the problem perpetuate, and become a massive epidemic...ultimately, they wont be able to afford health insurance, because the vast majority of those opposed aren't wealthy by any means...in-fact, a lot of the ones opposed that i personally know, are freaking unemployed, sucking off the teet of the govt while still complaining about "free handouts"...

im sorry if i offend anyone, but if that isn't the biggest crop of total bull sh*t, i dont know what is...there is absolutely no common sense in that equation...people are led around on their f*cking leashes repeating what they hear on the radio and on TV...some millionaire pundit tells them how to think, and what to say to the opposition.

going back to my previous point, it's a lot cheaper to protect the house against fires, than to wait until it burns down and rebuild with all your assets.

the system right now goes like this... (insurance company: "you're going to pay us 10,000 dollars a year, and we're going to tell you what you can and cannot get, and you should feel goddamn lucky for that")

i can't believe there are as many people out there as there are, sitting there and taking that corporate rape. my life, your life, americans lives, are not something to be profited off of, and that's exactly what's happening.



Soul Assassin said:


> ^^^ so according to that guy, if i get sick, it should be ok for my health insurance to drop me because the way health insurance works is healthy people pay and the company makes profits.


Well....if what he's saying is true, people don't need to buy insurance b/c the penalty is only $95. However, monthly premiums for law abiding citizens can be in the hundreds of dollars. Then, people don't need to buy insurance UNTIL they get sick then they're taken care of by this socialized medicine. Ultimately, the insurance company will lose millions of paying members and this whole thing falls apart. The gov't better jack up the penalty otherwise people will abuse that loophole. BTW nick, he never does address if its ok for providers to drop sick people...he simply described the current situation and how f'ed up the new one is.
[/quote]

Take into consideration that the vids are about 3-4 months old, they probably amended the sh*t out of it by now. Either way Americans are doomed, your public debt is $12.4 Trillion and another $60 Trillion for all your unfunded liabilites like; Social Security, Medicare, Medicate and off-balance sheet wars. It's mathematically imposible to pay it off. Therefore, the neoliberals and neoconservatives elites that rule over you will default via hyperinfaltion...this will crush the poor, the middle-class and retirees. Hate to be the harbinger of bad news but it's reality, IMHO. Another thing, Republicans + Democrats = the same thing.
[/quote]

debt could be paid off tomorrow...in-fact, inflation would help, less dollars to pay off china. and if they dont like it...come get your money, lets see what you got!


----------



## joey'd (Oct 26, 2005)

TheWayThingsR said:


> Heh, just read this.
> 
> "On this day in 1919 Benito Mussolini founded his Fascist political movement in Milan, Italy. On this day in 1933 The German Reichstag adopted the Enabling Act, which effectively granted Adolf Hitler dictatorial legislative powers. And on this day in 2010 President Barack Obama signed a massive, nearly $1 trillion health care overhaul. I hope it turns out better then the first two."


im my personal opinion, your comparing an apple to an orange.
your talking about 2 dictatorship communities that handed over power to one leader, or started a movement for it, comparing to a reform in public healthcare.....
i mean, let me know if i missed something here


----------



## TheWayThingsR (Jan 4, 2007)

joey said:


> Heh, just read this.
> 
> "On this day in 1919 Benito Mussolini founded his Fascist political movement in Milan, Italy. On this day in 1933 The German Reichstag adopted the Enabling Act, which effectively granted Adolf Hitler dictatorial legislative powers. And on this day in 2010 President Barack Obama signed a massive, nearly $1 trillion health care overhaul. I hope it turns out better then the first two."


im my personal opinion, your comparing an apple to an orange.
your talking about 2 dictatorship communities that handed over power to one leader, or started a movement for it, comparing to a reform in public healthcare.....
i mean, let me know if i missed something here








[/quote]
Well you can shove your personal opinion, I'm not comparing anything. Those are not my words, hence the quotes.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

maddyfish said:


> Personally I am hopeful for the future. This travesty will be a call to arms to remove many congressmen and then repeal this thing.


Yes, I am sure Republicans will repeal this - just like they repealed Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SSI, etc.. Well, either that or they'll expand it and try to take credit for it down the road - mark my words


----------



## CuzIsaidSo (Oct 13, 2009)

r1dermon said:


> ^^^ so according to that guy, if i get sick, it should be ok for my health insurance to drop me because the way health insurance works is healthy people pay and the company makes profits.


Well....if what he's saying is true, people don't need to buy insurance b/c the penalty is only $95. However, monthly premiums for law abiding citizens can be in the hundreds of dollars. Then, people don't need to buy insurance UNTIL they get sick then they're taken care of by this socialized medicine. Ultimately, the insurance company will lose millions of paying members and this whole thing falls apart. The gov't better jack up the penalty otherwise people will abuse that loophole. BTW nick, he never does address if its ok for providers to drop sick people...he simply described the current situation and how f'ed up the new one is.
[/quote]

Take into consideration that the vids are about 3-4 months old, they probably amended the sh*t out of it by now. Either way Americans are doomed, your public debt is $12.4 Trillion and another $60 Trillion for all your unfunded liabilites like; Social Security, Medicare, Medicate and off-balance sheet wars. It's mathematically imposible to pay it off. Therefore, the neoliberals and neoconservatives elites that rule over you will default via hyperinfaltion...this will crush the poor, the middle-class and retirees. Hate to be the harbinger of bad news but it's reality, IMHO. Another thing, Republicans + Democrats = the same thing.
[/quote]

debt could be paid off tomorrow...in-fact, inflation would help, less dollars to pay off china. and if they dont like it...come get your money, lets see what you got!
[/quote]

x2
Thanks for being the only person in this whole thread to make any sense


----------



## Guest (Mar 24, 2010)

r1dermon is a smart guy, usually brings a lot of information and sense to these kinds of debates


----------



## greenmonkey51 (Aug 16, 2004)

Jewelz said:


> Personally I am hopeful for the future. This travesty will be a call to arms to remove many congressmen and then repeal this thing.


Yes, I am sure Republicans will repeal this - just like they repealed Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SSI, etc.. Well, either that or they'll expand it and try to take credit for it down the road - mark my words
[/quote]

Why would anyone in their right mind take credit for those trainwrecks. No need to try and repeal something that will be struck down in the courts anyways. The states will assert there constitutional rights on this.


----------



## CuzIsaidSo (Oct 13, 2009)

This is why we need to do something about health care


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

greenmonkey51 said:


> Personally I am hopeful for the future. This travesty will be a call to arms to remove many congressmen and then repeal this thing.


Yes, I am sure Republicans will repeal this - just like they repealed Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SSI, etc.. Well, either that or they'll expand it and try to take credit for it down the road - mark my words
[/quote]

Why would anyone in their right mind take credit for those trainwrecks. No need to try and repeal something that will be struck down in the courts anyways. The states will assert there constitutional rights on this.
[/quote]

Because I suspect, much like SS, Medicare, Medicaid and everything else, the program will become popular. Imagine a group politicians campaigning with the slogan "We'll take your Medicare away!"; they'd lose in any of the 50 states. Ronald Reagan promised to abolish Department of Education when he campaigned in 1980; here it is, still standing 30 years later. Nothing ever gets repealed. Politicians love to repeat the rhetoric of small government but noone ever cuts the actual size of government and noone repeals social programs because people like social programs once they are enacted.

As far as the court challenges go - the courts cannot consider an entire bill, only provisions within the bill. So, the court will get petitioned and people will argue back and forth for years and nothing will happen.


----------



## Scrappy (Oct 21, 2004)

Anybody know how the Cadillac healthcare tax is going to work? (specifically for union workers) I was talking to some friends at work and no one has a clue what's going to happen. One guy says the company will get taxed and it won't affect us individually on taxes. And another friend says they'll asses the annual value of our healthcare and add it in as income on our taxes. If the latter happens then my taxable income will go up about 60%! That'd be absolutely insane.

We've got both sides trying to scare the bejesus out of us with their rhetoric, but neither of them seems to know how this bill is going to work when it's actually in use. Honestly, I think there should be some sort of punishment when politicians blatantly lie about stuff like this. Take for example when the gop was going ape sh*t about death panels. If there's nothing even resembling a death panel then those politicians should be prosecuted, because this "making crap up just to scare us into supporting their side" bs is just unethical.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

Scrappy said:


> Anybody know how the Cadillac healthcare tax is going to work? (specifically for union workers) I was talking to some friends at work and no one has a clue what's going to happen. One guy says the company will get taxed and it won't affect us individually on taxes. And another friend says they'll asses the annual value of our healthcare and add it in as income on our taxes. If the latter happens then my taxable income will go up about 60%! That'd be absolutely insane.
> 
> We've got both sides trying to scare the bejesus out of us with their rhetoric, but neither of them seems to know how this bill is going to work when it's actually in use. Honestly, I think there should be some sort of punishment when politicians blatantly lie about stuff like this. Take for example when the gop was going ape sh*t about death panels. If there's nothing even resembling a death panel then those politicians should be prosecuted, because this "making crap up just to scare us into supporting their side" bs is just unethical.


a MILLION ZILLION BILLION TRILLION% agree with this post...if there is no accountability, i dont care WTF it is, from your child lying to your face, to a corporation stealing billions of dollars, or covering up a malfunctioning product which causes deaths...there HAS to be accountability or else there is no lesson learned.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Scrappy said:


> Anybody know how the Cadillac healthcare tax is going to work? (specifically for union workers) I was talking to some friends at work and no one has a clue what's going to happen. One guy says the company will get taxed and it won't affect us individually on taxes. And another friend says they'll asses the annual value of our healthcare and add it in as income on our taxes. If the latter happens then my taxable income will go up about 60%! That'd be absolutely insane.
> 
> We've got both sides trying to scare the bejesus out of us with their rhetoric, but neither of them seems to know how this bill is going to work when it's actually in use. Honestly, I think there should be some sort of punishment when politicians blatantly lie about stuff like this. Take for example when the gop was going ape sh*t about death panels. If there's nothing even resembling a death panel then those politicians should be prosecuted, because this "making crap up just to scare us into supporting their side" bs is just unethical.


As much as I disagree with conservative fear-mongering about "death panels", they should be free to spout their lies without fear of prosecution. The ony time anyone should be prosecuted for lying is if they're lying under oath.


----------



## joey'd (Oct 26, 2005)

TheWayThingsR said:


> Heh, just read this.
> 
> "On this day in 1919 Benito Mussolini founded his Fascist political movement in Milan, Italy. On this day in 1933 The German Reichstag adopted the Enabling Act, which effectively granted Adolf Hitler dictatorial legislative powers. And on this day in 2010 President Barack Obama signed a massive, nearly $1 trillion health care overhaul. I hope it turns out better then the first two."


im my personal opinion, your comparing an apple to an orange.
your talking about 2 dictatorship communities that handed over power to one leader, or started a movement for it, comparing to a reform in public healthcare.....
i mean, let me know if i missed something here








[/quote]
Well you can shove your personal opinion, I'm not comparing anything. Those are not my words, hence the quotes.
[/quote]
oh ya, thats real mature, im assuming your insecurity due to your lack of intelligence is the motivation behind your ill retort to my sensible reply to your original comment, or your quotation of someone elses words.

your words or not, you felt that the words you quoted had anything intelligent to do with this conversation,a nd thus it does not.
good to know we havesmart people such as yourself serving our armed forces.









further more, i hope in the future you have somehting more constructive to reply with, 
best wishes to your day sir.


----------



## Piranha Dan (Nov 11, 2007)

In a nutshell, I'm opposed to this because I'm opposed to government control of healthcare. 
For those of you who are going to come back and say "This is not a government takeover" The following is stuff that I read in the health bill (translated into english). Please tell me if I'm correct or incorrect in understanding the following:

1. The government is going to create an insurance exchange market

2. In order to sell insurance in the united states, an insurance company will have to be a part of this exchange. The government will decided wheather you 
can be in the exchange or not, therefore the government is going to tell you wheather you can or cannot do business in this country.

3. The government is going to tell all insurance companies that are a part of the exchange who they can and cannot sell insurance to.

4. The government is going to tell all insurance companies that are a part of the exchange how much they can charge.

5. The government is going to tell all insurance companies that are a part of the exchange how much profit they are allowed to make.

If I'm correct about the above (and I'm not saying I am for sure because reading legalese is not one of my strengths), then doesn't this mean that, essentially, all the so called "private" insurance companies in the US are now just puppets of the government?

I have another interesting point I'd like to make but I need some assistance from members here who are from countries with socialized healthcare. Could you guys out there from Canada, Britain, the UK, etc tell me what percentage of your yearly salery goes to the government? I'm curious how much that free health care of yours actually costs. for instance, if I take my gross pay for 2009, and subract all my local, state, and federal taxes out of it, then take that lower number and divide it by the original gross, roughly 30% of my income for the year goes to Uncle Sam. What are you guys currently paying?


----------



## Kyle2154 (May 12, 2006)

joey said:


> Heh, just read this.
> 
> "On this day in 1919 Benito Mussolini founded his Fascist political movement in Milan, Italy. On this day in 1933 The German Reichstag adopted the Enabling Act, which effectively granted Adolf Hitler dictatorial legislative powers. And on this day in 2010 President Barack Obama signed a massive, nearly $1 trillion health care overhaul. I hope it turns out better then the first two."


im my personal opinion, your comparing an apple to an orange.
your talking about 2 dictatorship communities that handed over power to one leader, or started a movement for it, comparing to a reform in public healthcare.....
i mean, let me know if i missed something here








[/quote]
Well you can shove your personal opinion, I'm not comparing anything. Those are not my words, hence the quotes.
[/quote]
oh ya, thats real mature, im assuming your insecurity due to your lack of intelligence is the motivation behind your ill retort to my sensible reply to your original comment, or your quotation of someone elses words.

your words or not, you felt that the words you quoted had anything intelligent to do with this conversation,a nd thus it does not.
good to know we havesmart people such as yourself serving our armed forces.









further more, i hope in the future you have somehting more constructive to reply with, 
best wishes to your day sir.
[/quote]

Overreact much? He said "Heh, just read this" I don't think he meant it extremely seriously. And if you're going to make fun of intelligence levels can you at least not have 400 typos while doing so?


----------



## Nick G (Jul 15, 2007)

Jewelz if that link you posted is accurate, nothing will change for me at all with this plan. only once i make like 200k and have a wife and 2 kids my Medicare payroll taxes increase by 0.9% and ill have a 3.8% tax on investment income... i dont see that being a big deal since ill be making about 200 grand, whoopty doo.

i dont see how anyone who is in my shoes (single insured through employer and making less than 200k) can complain about this... yet my facebook news feed is full of retarted rich kids bitching that they are going to be paying for mexicans health care.


----------



## joey'd (Oct 26, 2005)

Kyle2154 said:


> Heh, just read this.
> 
> "On this day in 1919 Benito Mussolini founded his Fascist political movement in Milan, Italy. On this day in 1933 The German Reichstag adopted the Enabling Act, which effectively granted Adolf Hitler dictatorial legislative powers. And on this day in 2010 President Barack Obama signed a massive, nearly $1 trillion health care overhaul. I hope it turns out better then the first two."


im my personal opinion, your comparing an apple to an orange.
your talking about 2 dictatorship communities that handed over power to one leader, or started a movement for it, comparing to a reform in public healthcare.....
i mean, let me know if i missed something here








[/quote]
Well you can shove your personal opinion, I'm not comparing anything. Those are not my words, hence the quotes.
[/quote]
oh ya, thats real mature, im assuming your insecurity due to your lack of intelligence is the motivation behind your ill retort to my sensible reply to your original comment, or your quotation of someone elses words.

your words or not, you felt that the words you quoted had anything intelligent to do with this conversation,a nd thus it does not.
good to know we havesmart people such as yourself serving our armed forces.









further more, i hope in the future you have somehting more constructive to reply with, 
best wishes to your day sir.
[/quote]

Overreact much? He said "Heh, just read this" I don't think he meant it extremely seriously. And if you're going to make fun of intelligence levels can you at least not have 400 typos while doing so?
[/quote]
i am sorry, i do not see how i am over-reacting here.
im not being over dramatic in anyway shape or form, i think what bothers you is that i make a logical point here, and you happen to be too ignorant to see that.
it is idiotic to compare an almost criminal dictatorship to a healthcare reform.

and if you want to compare his thought level to my fast typing and lack of correction to said fast typing, i think you just about on his intelligence level there too, which if you cant figure out by now i dont think is very high.
Funny thing, you edited your reply, and you yourself have grammatical errors....... says a lot about you, but how much can you say about someone who picks away at another persons spelling, mostly in part due to the fact you dont have much of a leg to stand on, or a valid point to make either.
here is a nickel back for your two cents, and you can keep the change :laugh:


----------



## TheWayThingsR (Jan 4, 2007)

Joey'd, simmer down. I like the coincidence of the three. I'm sure a million other horrible things happened on March 23rd throughout history, I was just posting something that I saw on a couple of the most significant. Go take your ritalin bud.


----------



## Kyle2154 (May 12, 2006)

I liked the thing he put up as well. And Joey, I don't have any problem with typos, just, again, when you are dissing on someone with your ramblings on about how smart you are, you should probably double checks things, it looks really odd to see someone say something like "Wleld due to me being vastly suprioro to you becuse you are stuped..." I can't tell if you're joking or being serious.


----------



## joey'd (Oct 26, 2005)

Kyle2154 said:


> I liked the thing he put up as well. And Joey, I don't have any problem with typos, just, again, when you are dissing on someone with your ramblings on about how smart you are, you should probably double checks things, it looks really odd to see someone say something like "Wleld due to me being vastly suprioro to you becuse you are stuped..." I can't tell if you're joking or being serious.


it seems that in this case, 6x2=28


----------

