Global Warming News

[20 20]

. The Founders had good reason to fear an all powerful government. I think that was rational then and still is now.

100% agree what is the difference between a dictator or an all powerfull government corporate power?

I do think we need a government that is powerful enough to level the playing field occassionally when it serves the public interest.

Wouldn't a government for the PEOPLE be made up of the PEOPLE! As it stands now our government is its own beast, career politicians need to GO!!!

 

[FallbrookFarmer]

Good Morning to You!

I'm not advocating much of anything here. Just trying to step back and see some of the big picture. The Founders had good reason to fear an all powerful government. I think that was rational then and still is now.

I do think we need a government that is powerful enough to level the playing field occassionally when it serves the public interest. What the leveling mechanism should be in the case of health care, I don't know the answer. If I had to choose a solution, I would make all health insurers 'non-profit' entities with some finite definitions on what 'health insurance non-profit' means. That does not encumber their ability to compete. And, there has to be a way to reward those which are better run than others too. Some incentive that is real money but controlled or limited. After all, they are not adding real value to the system in the way that the inventor of a better CAT scan machine does, for example.

Health insurers spend millions on lobbying and buying huge amounts of ad time on TV, and do it with insurance premium money paid by their customers - who thought they were purchasing health care insurance - not ad time and congressional votes. There is room for improvement in that scenario. They are shameless and arrogant as an industry. A little reigning in is called for.
Dave.

Trust me, I used to belong to an HMO. I know what a PITA they are. No doubt we can always look to improve our lot in life, but to take the far look as opposed to sometimes the short view.
Might I suggest an excellent book to everyone, I think its available as a download from many libraries for free, Is
Thomas Sowells;Basic Economics, A common sense guide to the economy.
Again, trying to get back on topic, it does a lot to explain why some of us see such a danger in AGW and the Health Care debate.
Thanks for trying to keep the discussion civil.

 

[20 20]

One thing I've noticed no one is writting. It is the fact those making the decissions on OUR health care allready have full coverage. I'd say we could make a decission about their pay, maybe to straighten them out but ooooops they decide that also.

 

[Ken45101]

To Clarify. All the things that you mention, Libraries,Police,fire etc. are taxed at the local level.

Actually the Feds are starting to fund fire departments, under the guise of FEMA. Just another way for DC to wrap it's tentacles around everything. And of course, a lot of police funding comes from the Feds.

 

[Chuck52]

Another analogy would be a committee meeting.

Time for the referee to call the game, assuming he's awake.


Chuck

 

[aczlan]

Mike, this one is too easy, quit throwing me softballs! You know as well as I that we can throw polls against each other all day long; for every poll you find to support "against", I can find one that supports "for".
Majority in U.S. Favors Healthcare Reform This Year

You can find 6 month old polls that support your view, but can you find a poll from this month that says the same thing now that people have seen the wrangling and shady deals that have been going on to get the bill passed? (as opposed to a poll from 6 months ago)

Most of the current polls that Gallup is listing are putting the numbers at roughly 50/50. Some examples include:
In U.S., Majority Favors Suspending Work on Healthcare Bill
Healthcare Bill Support Ticks Up; Public Still Divided
Majority of Americans Still Not Backing Healthcare Bill (from 16 Dec)
A list of health care polls: Healthcare

Personally I think that the current bill is more like a band-aid than the real reform needed. What is needed is for the COSTS to go down. Saying "here is $(.5*X) for the procedure you billed us $X for (ala medicare) is going to force doctors and hospitals to increase billing rates, go out of business or lower the level of care to unacceptable levels (40-1 Patient-Staff levels anyone?).

Having the ability to buy healthcare across state lines would be a good start, as would tort reform. But paying trillions of dollars on a plan that is not sustainable long term to insure 15% of Americans is not. Allowing anyone (even illegals) to be covered without paying anything into the system is not going to work. I am strongly against the "Dole/Handout System". I feel that if you are receiving government assistance (be it for food, healthcare, rent or what have you) you should be doing SOMETHING for it if you are physically/mentally capable. Otherwise there are many who will (and do) sit at home playing [VIDEOGAMESYSTEM] all day and have no incentive to go out and get a job.

Overall, I dont think that most of our congresscritters really believe in healthcare reform or they would still be working on passing it with a simple majority. If it is as important as they were saying that it is/was back in Dec sitting through the reading of a 2000 page bill would be a small price to pay to pass it.

Aaron Z

 

[turbo36]

You can find 6 month old polls that support your view, but can you find a poll from this month that says the same thing now that people have seen the wrangling and shady deals that have been going on to get the bill passed? (as opposed to a poll from 6 months ago)

Most of the current polls that Gallup is listing are putting the numbers at roughly 50/50. Some examples include:
In U.S., Majority Favors Suspending Work on Healthcare Bill
Healthcare Bill Support Ticks Up; Public Still Divided
Majority of Americans Still Not Backing Healthcare Bill (from 16 Dec)
A list of health care polls: Healthcare

Personally I think that the current bill is more like a band-aid than the real reform needed. What is needed is for the COSTS to go down. Saying "here is $(.5*X) for the procedure you billed us $X for (ala medicare) is going to force doctors and hospitals to increase billing rates, go out of business or lower the level of care to unacceptable levels (40-1 Patient-Staff levels anyone?).

Having the ability to buy healthcare across state lines would be a good start, as would tort reform. But paying trillions of dollars on a plan that is not sustainable long term to insure 15% of Americans is not. Allowing anyone (even illegals) to be covered without paying anything into the system is not going to work. I am strongly against the "Dole/Handout System". I feel that if you are receiving government assistance (be it for food, healthcare, rent or what have you) you should be doing SOMETHING for it if you are physically/mentally capable. Otherwise there are many who will (and do) sit at home playing [VIDEOGAMESYSTEM] all day and have no incentive to go out and get a job.

Overall, I dont think that most of our congresscritters really believe in healthcare reform or they would still be working on passing it with a simple majority. If it is as important as they were saying that it is/was back in Dec sitting through the reading of a 2000 page bill would be a small price to pay to pass it.

Aaron Z

The support for health-care reform will always vary depending on the current proposal going through congress, my point was that MikePA said the clear majority does not support reform and that is just not true. Most people believe we have a very complicated system that needs to be simplified and I support that. I don't necessarily support a government run single payer system but what we have now is an incredibly expensive system compared to my what my competitors have in their respective countries.

 

[IH3444]

Geeze Turbo, they just took the latest and greatest poll in Massachusetts. Coffee been on all day. Get a cup! Drink up brother.

 

[turbo36]

Geeze Turbo, they just took the latest and greatest poll in Massachusetts. Coffee been on all day. Get a cup! Drink up brother.

You know, I was discussing this same election with my fellow Republican buddies the night before the election and the consensus was that the Democratic candidate was so bad that anything less then a landslide wouldn't mean much.

 

[MikePA]

Clearly a number of people worship at the alter of government and changing their minds with facts will not disabuse them of their belief that government is not only the best solution, it's the only solution. Why anyone would believe getting government involved would reduce costs or simplify anything is beyond my ability to comprehend.

 

[keegs]

Clearly a number of people worship at the alter of government and changing their minds with facts will not disabuse them of their belief that government is not only the best solution, it's the only solution. Why anyone would believe getting government involved would reduce costs or simplify anything is beyond my ability to comprehend.

Mike,

Your position is understandable given your disregard for what governments around the world have done to achieve significant cost savings.

The fact remains however that relative to other systems in the deveoped world, ours costs double, we don't insure everone and many are uninsurable.

 

[FallbrookFarmer]

You know, I was discussing this same election with my fellow Republican buddies the night before the election and the consensus was that the Democratic candidate was so bad that anything less then a landslide wouldn't mean much.

Just got back from moving some dirt around, Glad to see the thread hasn't died.
I was thinking about the Mass. election and it's implication
Question: Isn't MassCare or whatever it's called probably the closest thing to what is being proposed? I leave it to you to draw your own conclusions about the election.
How about this for an idea? Every state ,Like Mass. did, institute their own form of "public option" or some variation thereon. Then instead of throwing all are eggs in one basket, we can figure out what works and what doesn't, and it would be totally constitutional. Your Thoughts?

 

[IH3444]

You know, I was discussing this same election with my fellow Republican buddies the night before the election and the consensus was that the Democratic candidate was so bad that anything less then a landslide wouldn't mean much.

Oh, that's beautiful! What a spin! You should write comedy. I can't stop laughing. This is great stuff. I love it. More, more, more, please.

I spoke with a buddy up there also. He told me his neighbors, were extremely left leaning Democrats who voted for Scott. Their explaination was they had no idea what was in the health care bill, and that's what was causing them to vote republican.

I agree, landslide, Nov. 2, 2010

 

[FallbrookFarmer]

Mike,

Your position is understandable given your disregard for what governments around the world have done to achieve significant cost savings.

The fact remains however that relative to other systems in the deveoped world, ours costs double, we don't insure everone and many are uninsurable.

Keegs
I think that you have might have found the fly in the ointment, Perhaps some governments have achieved "significant cost savings". But have they improved the quality or quantity of CARE?
If you or one of your family members were going into the hospital for a life saving procedure, would you be concerned about "significant cost savings"?

 

[turbo36]

Oh, that's beautiful! What a spin! You should write comedy. I can't stop laughing. This is great stuff. I love it. More, more, more, please.

See that's the trouble today, if it ain't on Fox then it can't be republican can it?? I miss the days when a republican could entertain an independent thought and make up his own mind.

 

[IH3444]

The spin stops here brother....I'm still laughing. Keep'em comming!

I watch'em all, but fox was just polled as the most trusted station. Google it.

You can fool some of the people some of the time, most of the people some of the time, all of the people for a brief time, but not all of the people all of the time. Which one are we at now?

Huffington post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/20/******-finds-out-scott-br_n_429843.html

 

[Loren49]

A problem with our current system: I believe most would agree that auto insurance works because everyone needs liability coverage. Obviously people can't wait until after an accident to get coverage. The real challenge with forcing insurance companies to accept all people (no exception for prior condition) is that you could delay purchasing coverage until a problem occurs. Therefore people must be required to have coverage for this to work which really upsets many. (Especially if you're young and healthy) This is part of the reason the proposed bill is 2000 pages long.

There are many examples of government being relatively efficient - Medicare uses considerably less % of resources for administration than private companies.

I also appreciate the civil discussion of these sometimes volatile issues.

Loren

 

[FallbrookFarmer]

As this thread has degenerated to NAH-Nah-Nah!
Will the last one out please turn off the lights

 

[Loren49]

I couldn't resist - here's some good reading before you turn off the light.

CAUTION -only open if you want to look at things from a different perspective.
Garrison Keillor - Salon.com

Loren

 

[MikePA]

Mike,

Your position is understandable given your disregard for what governments around the world have done to achieve significant cost savings.

The fact remains however that relative to other systems in the deveoped world, ours costs double, we don't insure everone and many are uninsurable.

1. 'Reduce costs' is a euphemism for reduced care
2. I disregard 'what governments around the world have done' because I don't think running health care is a job of government. Also, see Item 1.
3. You mistake not being insured with not getting health care.