House passed the Health Bill
- Thread starter bionicarm
- Start date
uneverno
Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3249946
lol, I'm not even that cynical.
lol - just an observision©. I'm comparitively old. I've seen this before. Repeatedly. On both sides of the aisle.
Bottom line: Party > Country. I.e. in politics especially, truth can be (and often is) sacrificed on the altar of personal victory.
The greatest spoil of war is the writing of its history.
Napoleon
http:///forum/post/3249946
lol, I'm not even that cynical.
lol - just an observision©. I'm comparitively old. I've seen this before. Repeatedly. On both sides of the aisle.
Bottom line: Party > Country. I.e. in politics especially, truth can be (and often is) sacrificed on the altar of personal victory.
The greatest spoil of war is the writing of its history.
Napoleon
mrdc
Active Member
More info:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aa32kl.M09T4
No more tanning beds for some.
Pre-existing condition coverage is going to be a tough one.
This isn't going to be an easy task either...
"Insurers also will have to reveal how much of members’ premiums they spend on medical care, as opposed to executive salaries or other administrative costs"
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aa32kl.M09T4
No more tanning beds for some.
Pre-existing condition coverage is going to be a tough one.
This isn't going to be an easy task either...
"Insurers also will have to reveal how much of members’ premiums they spend on medical care, as opposed to executive salaries or other administrative costs"
sickboy
Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3250041
Or no longer match a portion of 401K...there are a ton of things businesses will do...
Originally Posted by mrdc
http:///forum/post/3250051
Yep and it will in the end the give the employees the shaft. I wonder what companies (like the one my brother works for) that quit making 401k contributions a year ago will cut out next to pay for this.
I wouldn't count on that stuff:
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/...-jobs-by-2018/
http:///forum/post/3250041
Or no longer match a portion of 401K...there are a ton of things businesses will do...
Originally Posted by mrdc
http:///forum/post/3250051
Yep and it will in the end the give the employees the shaft. I wonder what companies (like the one my brother works for) that quit making 401k contributions a year ago will cut out next to pay for this.
I wouldn't count on that stuff:
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/...-jobs-by-2018/
scottnlisa
Member
Woohooo. It was a great day for the country and the democrats. It is about time we have a president that is concerned about issues that will help the country and not worried about going to war with other countries like 2 past presidents. Way to go President Obama. Good job.
meowzer
Moderator
Originally Posted by scottnlisa
http:///forum/post/3250354
Woohooo. It was a great day for the country and the democrats. It is about time we have a president that is concerned about issues that will help the country and not worried about going to war with other countries like 2 past presidents. Way to go President Obama. Good job.
....please do not tell me that came from you my friend........you have SOOOOOOO much to learn
http:///forum/post/3250354
Woohooo. It was a great day for the country and the democrats. It is about time we have a president that is concerned about issues that will help the country and not worried about going to war with other countries like 2 past presidents. Way to go President Obama. Good job.
....please do not tell me that came from you my friend........you have SOOOOOOO much to learn
scottnlisa
Member
Originally Posted by meowzer
http:///forum/post/3250357
....please do not tell me that came from you my friend........you have SOOOOOOO much to learn
Sorry but it did. the greatest day in history was the day Mr. Obama took office. This bill that passed needs some work still but it is a step in the right direction. It would go alot easier if the Republicans would stop crying about Mcain and miss "I can see Russia from my back yard" losing the election and start working with President Obama and not against him.
http:///forum/post/3250357
....please do not tell me that came from you my friend........you have SOOOOOOO much to learnSorry but it did. the greatest day in history was the day Mr. Obama took office. This bill that passed needs some work still but it is a step in the right direction. It would go alot easier if the Republicans would stop crying about Mcain and miss "I can see Russia from my back yard" losing the election and start working with President Obama and not against him.
lovethesea
Active Member
talk to us in a few years and we will check your feelings about it. Something does need to be done....just NOT this.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by scottnlisa
http:///forum/post/3250360
Sorry but it did. the greatest day in history was the day Mr. Obama took office. This bill that passed needs some work still but it is a step in the right direction. It would go alot easier if the Republicans would stop crying about Mcain and miss "I can see Russia from my back yard" losing the election and start working with President Obama and not against him.
I didn't know Tina Fey was on the ticket...
http:///forum/post/3250360
Sorry but it did. the greatest day in history was the day Mr. Obama took office. This bill that passed needs some work still but it is a step in the right direction. It would go alot easier if the Republicans would stop crying about Mcain and miss "I can see Russia from my back yard" losing the election and start working with President Obama and not against him.
I didn't know Tina Fey was on the ticket...
reefraff
Active Member
Originally Posted by scottnlisa
http:///forum/post/3250360
Sorry but it did. the greatest day in history was the day Mr. Obama took office. This bill that passed needs some work still but it is a step in the right direction. It would go alot easier if the Republicans would stop crying about Mcain and miss "I can see Russia from my back yard" losing the election and start working with President Obama and not against him.
you have SOOOOOOO much to learn
Why would anyone who isn't a fan of socialism which I would assume would include most Republicans ever work with someone like Obama who wants to drag us into the same style of socialism the Europeans cling to? Mr. "I have visited 57 states" will give Jimmy Carter a run for worste presidency of my life time.
http:///forum/post/3250360
Sorry but it did. the greatest day in history was the day Mr. Obama took office. This bill that passed needs some work still but it is a step in the right direction. It would go alot easier if the Republicans would stop crying about Mcain and miss "I can see Russia from my back yard" losing the election and start working with President Obama and not against him.
you have SOOOOOOO much to learn
Why would anyone who isn't a fan of socialism which I would assume would include most Republicans ever work with someone like Obama who wants to drag us into the same style of socialism the Europeans cling to? Mr. "I have visited 57 states" will give Jimmy Carter a run for worste presidency of my life time.
sickboy
Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3250386
Why would anyone who isn't a fan of socialism which I would assume would include most Republicans ever work with someone like Obama who wants to drag us into the same style of socialism the Europeans cling to? Mr. "I have visited 57 states" will give Jimmy Carter a run for worste presidency of my life time.
Still stuck on socialism huh? And you don't in any way see how this could possibly produce the most innovative period in our history (assumption being proper implementation). Not saying it will happen, but rather could.
http:///forum/post/3250386
Why would anyone who isn't a fan of socialism which I would assume would include most Republicans ever work with someone like Obama who wants to drag us into the same style of socialism the Europeans cling to? Mr. "I have visited 57 states" will give Jimmy Carter a run for worste presidency of my life time.
Still stuck on socialism huh? And you don't in any way see how this could possibly produce the most innovative period in our history (assumption being proper implementation). Not saying it will happen, but rather could.
sickboy
Active Member
As for the constitutionality of the bill, I find this interesting (but in can no way attest for its accuracy):
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/23/...li-washington/
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/23/...li-washington/
reefraff
Active Member
Originally Posted by mrdc
http:///forum/post/3250230
More info:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aa32kl.M09T4
No more tanning beds for some.
Pre-existing condition coverage is going to be a tough one.
This isn't going to be an easy task either...
"Insurers also will have to reveal how much of members’ premiums they spend on medical care, as opposed to executive salaries or other administrative costs"
That requiring insurance companies to break down their finances might be another item for a constitutional challenge. I seem to remember hearing about another instance where a federal court ruled against the government for something similar.
http:///forum/post/3250230
More info:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aa32kl.M09T4
No more tanning beds for some.
Pre-existing condition coverage is going to be a tough one.
This isn't going to be an easy task either...
"Insurers also will have to reveal how much of members’ premiums they spend on medical care, as opposed to executive salaries or other administrative costs"
That requiring insurance companies to break down their finances might be another item for a constitutional challenge. I seem to remember hearing about another instance where a federal court ruled against the government for something similar.
reefraff
Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/3250393
Still stuck on socialism huh? And you don't in any way see how this could possibly produce the most innovative period in our history (assumption being proper implementation). Not saying it will happen, but rather could.
When he wants the government to take over health care, Is dictating salaries banks can pay their executives AFTER they repaid their bailout loans as agreed with interest among other things what would you call it? Socialism, facism, maybe sofacialism
http:///forum/post/3250393
Still stuck on socialism huh? And you don't in any way see how this could possibly produce the most innovative period in our history (assumption being proper implementation). Not saying it will happen, but rather could.
When he wants the government to take over health care, Is dictating salaries banks can pay their executives AFTER they repaid their bailout loans as agreed with interest among other things what would you call it? Socialism, facism, maybe sofacialism
reefraff
Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/3250396
As for the constitutionality of the bill, I find this interesting (but in can no way attest for its accuracy):
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/23/...li-washington/
LOL, you don't think this sentence might indicate a slight bias here do you
"Yesterday, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli announced that he would join a growing list of right-wing attorneys general who are suing to have health reform"
As far as the rest goes just because something was done before doesn't make it constitutional. Had it been challenged and stood then it would be relevent. Most of the better legal scholors I've listened to think this will be a close call one way or another. Going to be interesting. They are challenging on at least two fronts.
http:///forum/post/3250396
As for the constitutionality of the bill, I find this interesting (but in can no way attest for its accuracy):
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/23/...li-washington/
LOL, you don't think this sentence might indicate a slight bias here do you
"Yesterday, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli announced that he would join a growing list of right-wing attorneys general who are suing to have health reform"
As far as the rest goes just because something was done before doesn't make it constitutional. Had it been challenged and stood then it would be relevent. Most of the better legal scholors I've listened to think this will be a close call one way or another. Going to be interesting. They are challenging on at least two fronts.
geridoc
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3250420
When he wants the government to take over health care, Is dictating salaries banks can pay their executives AFTER they repaid their bailout loans as agreed with interest among other things what would you call it? Socialism, facism, maybe sofacialism
Regulated capitalism.
http:///forum/post/3250420
When he wants the government to take over health care, Is dictating salaries banks can pay their executives AFTER they repaid their bailout loans as agreed with interest among other things what would you call it? Socialism, facism, maybe sofacialism
Regulated capitalism.
scsinet
Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/3250449
Regulated capitalism.
There is another term for this... when the economy is privately held but controlled by government...
Fascism.
http:///forum/post/3250449
Regulated capitalism.
There is another term for this... when the economy is privately held but controlled by government...
Fascism.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/3250396
As for the constitutionality of the bill, I find this interesting (but in can no way attest for its accuracy):
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/23/...li-washington/
Do me a favor, if you're going to be slumming around these left wing nutcase websites. Go dig around some conservative websites... Why not go read the heritage foundations stuff.
I've read this before, but somewhere, at least about government mandating gun ownership... There is no comparison...
It would be like me saying FDR supports locking up people who don't buy Health insurance because he locked up the Japanese.
If anything he's saying you're drafted but you gotta bring your own gun. The very opposite of let government take care of you...
http:///forum/post/3250396
As for the constitutionality of the bill, I find this interesting (but in can no way attest for its accuracy):
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/23/...li-washington/
Do me a favor, if you're going to be slumming around these left wing nutcase websites. Go dig around some conservative websites... Why not go read the heritage foundations stuff.
I've read this before, but somewhere, at least about government mandating gun ownership... There is no comparison...
It would be like me saying FDR supports locking up people who don't buy Health insurance because he locked up the Japanese.
If anything he's saying you're drafted but you gotta bring your own gun. The very opposite of let government take care of you...
slice
Active Member
Sorry for not having an avatar yet, I just registered a few minutes ago (been lurking a few days). I had no idea that my first post would be political, but you folks hit a few hot buttons...
Someone once said:
"If you cannot write your idea on the back of a matchbook cover, you do not have a clear idea".
We were told this bill is to do a few basic things, among these are 1) Reduce cost 2) Eliminate refusal to cover pre-existing conditions 3) Allow everyone access to health care insurance.
We were told "Health Care costs will double in the next 6 years", or something close to that. No one ever said why cost will double. No one that I have heard has addressed the root causes for increased costs. Is it government intervention? FDA regulation? Nuisance lawsuits? Interstate regulations, prohibiting insurance firms to compete across state lines? All we were told is that insurance companies are the villain (gotta have a villain, right?), even though insurance companies only make 2.5-3.5% profit (pretty low as corporations go).
Nothing in the bill addresses the root causes (and yes, I have mostly read the various flavors of the bills) because the bill is not about lowering cost, it is about government control.
Eliminating the practice of refusing coverage of pre-existing conditions can be written as a law almost as simply as writing this post, but it is not about that, it is about government control.
All other "objectives" of the bill could have been achieved as simply, if the bill was about "reform" instead of government control.
And there is the manipulation of opinion. For over a year now, we have been told "Its either THIS or NOTHING!" In logic, this would be called a "False Dichotomy", where only 2 alternatives are considered when a multitude of possibilities may exist. Personally, I call it a damn lie.
In short, 2700+ pages is not required to "reform" health care, but it IS required to mire down our system in government control. And of course, we are now told that this is just the beginning....
One more quote:
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.”
OK, enough of that, time for me to read more on setting up this 47g FOWLR tank.....
Thanks for your time,
Slice
Someone once said:
"If you cannot write your idea on the back of a matchbook cover, you do not have a clear idea".
We were told this bill is to do a few basic things, among these are 1) Reduce cost 2) Eliminate refusal to cover pre-existing conditions 3) Allow everyone access to health care insurance.
We were told "Health Care costs will double in the next 6 years", or something close to that. No one ever said why cost will double. No one that I have heard has addressed the root causes for increased costs. Is it government intervention? FDA regulation? Nuisance lawsuits? Interstate regulations, prohibiting insurance firms to compete across state lines? All we were told is that insurance companies are the villain (gotta have a villain, right?), even though insurance companies only make 2.5-3.5% profit (pretty low as corporations go).
Nothing in the bill addresses the root causes (and yes, I have mostly read the various flavors of the bills) because the bill is not about lowering cost, it is about government control.
Eliminating the practice of refusing coverage of pre-existing conditions can be written as a law almost as simply as writing this post, but it is not about that, it is about government control.
All other "objectives" of the bill could have been achieved as simply, if the bill was about "reform" instead of government control.
And there is the manipulation of opinion. For over a year now, we have been told "Its either THIS or NOTHING!" In logic, this would be called a "False Dichotomy", where only 2 alternatives are considered when a multitude of possibilities may exist. Personally, I call it a damn lie.
In short, 2700+ pages is not required to "reform" health care, but it IS required to mire down our system in government control. And of course, we are now told that this is just the beginning....
One more quote:
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.”
OK, enough of that, time for me to read more on setting up this 47g FOWLR tank.....
Thanks for your time,
Slice
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by Slice
http:///forum/post/3250473
Sorry for not having an avatar yet, I just registered a few minutes ago (been lurking a few days). I had no idea that my first post would be political, but you folks hit a few hot buttons...
Someone once said:
"If you cannot write your idea on the back of a matchbook cover, you do not have a clear idea".
We were told this bill is to do a few basic things, among these are 1) Reduce cost 2) Eliminate refusal to cover pre-existing conditions 3) Allow everyone access to health care insurance.
We were told "Health Care costs will double in the next 6 years", or something close to that. No one ever said why cost will double. No one that I have heard has addressed the root causes for increased costs. Is it government intervention? FDA regulation? Nuisance lawsuits? Interstate regulations, prohibiting insurance firms to compete across state lines?
Nothing in the bill addresses the root causes (and yes, I have mostly read the various flavors of the bills) because the bill in not about lowering cost, it is about government control.
Eliminating the practice of refusing coverage of pre-existing conditions can be written as a law almost as simply as writing this post, but it is not about that, it is about government control.
All other "objectives" of the bill could have been achieved as simply, if the bill was about "reform" instead of government control.
In short, 2700+ pages is not required to "reform" health care, but it IS required to mire down our system in government control. And of course, we are now told that this is just the beginning....
One more quote:
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.”
OK, enough of that, time for me to read more on setting up this 47g FOWLR tank.....
Thanks for your time,
Slice
If nothing else, your first post was an excellent post. btw welcome to the boards.
http:///forum/post/3250473
Sorry for not having an avatar yet, I just registered a few minutes ago (been lurking a few days). I had no idea that my first post would be political, but you folks hit a few hot buttons...
Someone once said:
"If you cannot write your idea on the back of a matchbook cover, you do not have a clear idea".
We were told this bill is to do a few basic things, among these are 1) Reduce cost 2) Eliminate refusal to cover pre-existing conditions 3) Allow everyone access to health care insurance.
We were told "Health Care costs will double in the next 6 years", or something close to that. No one ever said why cost will double. No one that I have heard has addressed the root causes for increased costs. Is it government intervention? FDA regulation? Nuisance lawsuits? Interstate regulations, prohibiting insurance firms to compete across state lines?
Nothing in the bill addresses the root causes (and yes, I have mostly read the various flavors of the bills) because the bill in not about lowering cost, it is about government control.
Eliminating the practice of refusing coverage of pre-existing conditions can be written as a law almost as simply as writing this post, but it is not about that, it is about government control.
All other "objectives" of the bill could have been achieved as simply, if the bill was about "reform" instead of government control.
In short, 2700+ pages is not required to "reform" health care, but it IS required to mire down our system in government control. And of course, we are now told that this is just the beginning....
One more quote:
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.”
OK, enough of that, time for me to read more on setting up this 47g FOWLR tank.....
Thanks for your time,
Slice