Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
December 17, 2014, 06:53:09 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: 24/7 Ventrilo Voice chat -click for instructions and free software here
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Health care bill dead?  (Read 4870 times)
hankdog1
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 849


Location: Cedar Bluff, VA


« on: January 21, 2010, 03:26:32 PM »

Supposedly the health care bill is dead.  The house doesn't have the votes to put through the senate bill.  So where does that leave us?  Is it really dead or are politicians just going to make up another piece of garbage behind closed doors?  Honestly i don't think any of us will see the real reform that is needed for the vast majority.  Just wondering what everyone else's thoughts are on the subject and if you think it's really dead or just another ploy to keep us like sheep?
Logged

Take me to the land of milk and honey!!!
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15316


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2010, 03:51:33 PM »

i think the current bill is dead.  my hope is that they will start over.  there are things that need to be done.  the true believers are still licking their wounds, but because they are true believers, they will come out swinging.  if cooler heads will prevail, and if this can  be put off until after the '10 elections, we may get something that we can live with out of all this.

the best thing that could happen is for states to do their own health care reform.  that's where this belongs, but the states won't want to spend the money if they think they can get the feds to cough up.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
ayyon2157
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 107

Location: Northeast Indiana, USA


« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2010, 04:29:38 PM »

     My wish would be for a "single payer" system, but it is not going to happen.  I am a cynic, and believe votes by our senators and representatives are bought and paid for by the interests involved, and that most of them wouldn't give an obese rodent's rectum what is best for the people they represent.

    The price of a "yea" vote will undoubtedly go up under the present situation, but I believe it will be pushed through.  The insurance companies (and many of the doctors) will not stand for anything else.  The doctors will threaten to quit, but if there are no insurance companies to go work for, they will consider their present situation to be the least objectionable of whatever is available to them.

     India is so full of highly qualified doctors that I believe they could easily replace all the medical practitioners in this country (assuming that they dressed a translator in a nurse's uniform to stay with them). I hear about migrant laborers with medical degrees who maybe practice one day a week and pick vegetables the rest of the time.

     The military seems to be able to retain proficient doctors on pay scales comparable to what a "single payer" system would pay them. I am on medicare, and get along just fine.

ayyon2157
Logged

William H. Michaels
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15316


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2010, 04:32:13 PM »

single payer leads to less health care for all.  that would include you.  it is the worst possible solution the the things that need to be fixed in health care. 
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
hankdog1
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 849


Location: Cedar Bluff, VA


« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2010, 08:07:56 PM »

 grin Kathy Virginia just passed a law that it's residents don't have to carry insurance no matter what the feds say. 
Logged

Take me to the land of milk and honey!!!
alfred
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 420


Location: Loveland Colorado USA


WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2010, 09:39:07 PM »

How do you figure that single payer leads to less health care for all? I don't understand.
Alfred
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15316


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2010, 09:55:34 PM »

300 million people on a govt run health care plan.  does that sound like a recipe for efficiency and good care?  medicare is already broke.  they already under pay for the service they provide. that's part of what drives our insurance cost up.  remove the private sector and profit from the system and you have less innovation, fewer new drugs, and less updating of facilities and equipment.  we already have a shortage of doctors.  if you go to single payer, you must regulate doctors pay.  why would anyone spend 10 or more years in schooling and rack up huge loans to have the government take away their ability to make money?  single payer also requires rationing.  one of obamas czars already wrote up a formula for it.  if you are not young and able enough to contribute to society, you shouldn't get the same level of care.  thats what the "best practices' thing they slipped into the stimulus bill was all about.  cost/benefit analysis of drugs and care.  that decision made by a panel rather than by you and your doc.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Galaxy
New Bee
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 26


Location: Blue Ridge Mountains, Virginia


« Reply #7 on: January 21, 2010, 10:19:47 PM »

     My wish would be for a "single payer" system, but it is not going to happen.  I am a cynic, and believe votes by our senators and representatives are bought and paid for by the interests involved, and that most of them wouldn't give an obese rodent's rectum what is best for the people they represent.
Why would you turn the nation's health care over to politicians (which is what a "single payer" system would do) if you believe that about politicians?  By the way, I believe you are largely correct about politcians.
Logged
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2010, 08:37:09 AM »

They could do two things to vastly improve the health care system.

1) Allow coverage to be bought outside the state you live in. (Increase competition)

2) Tort Reform. (Limit liability)

Tackle those two items, and add tax credits (Or gov subsidies) for the uninsured and those TRULY needing help, and keep the private practice, and the worlds best health care system in place.

That is much better than the crap they were trying to jam down our throats. It would lower premiums (and don't fool yourself, your premiums were going up with Obamacare) and cover more people.

Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
lenape13
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 612


Location: Belle Vernon, PA

We survive together, or not at all!


« Reply #9 on: January 22, 2010, 09:33:15 AM »

Tort reform is one of the biggest concerns.  It is ridiculus the amount of money juries are awarding these days.  True doctors make mistakes.  Guess what, they're human and will therefore make mistakes, but these crazy judgements are getting way out of hand.  People are just getting sue happy in this country, and it has to stop.
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15316


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #10 on: January 22, 2010, 02:18:19 PM »

tort reform i a big one.  i do not know any doctors who have not been sued.  often, it has nothing to do with medical practices.  even when a case gets tossed, it costs the doc and insurance company money.  most of the time, they settle because the cost of going to court is so high and you never know what a jury will do. 
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5525


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #11 on: January 22, 2010, 05:46:46 PM »

Tort reform?
Now why would we even want to look at one of the major costs of medical insurance? Undecided
As far as a government run plan,I don't want some beauracrat  making live or death decisions on the basis of its cost effectiveness for my loved ones.The more I see of political decision making processes,the more I fear the idea of themmaking a medical decision for me.
Logged
alfred
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 420


Location: Loveland Colorado USA


WWW
« Reply #12 on: January 22, 2010, 07:09:14 PM »

I disagree with a few things presented here about our health care system and some of the conclusions as well.

I do agree that Tort reform is much needed and would help greatly. It is not true that we have the best health care system in the world. We are currently rated number 37 by WHO.  This is even though we spend far and away more money for our healthcare than any other country. Pharmaceutical companies are making out like bandits and spending huge amounts of money to hawk expensive drugs to you and me that most of us don’t need. The drugs we do need they hold monopoly on and charge us exorbitant prices for. The insurance system eats up a huge amount of this money in its bureaucracy which is designed to keep you and me from getting any treatment at all, so that they can make more money. Hospitals, Specialists and equipment manufacturers are also driving up the costs. The reason that there is a shortage of Doctors is because they are all doing specialist work where they can charge huge sums of money while the General Practitioner can’t do so as easily. Equipment manufacturers are pushing advanced equipment that is rarely needed and making a boodle as well. I think that our government is quite capable of running a top notch health care system if we let it. Our fire and rescue first responders are operated by our government and so is our military both of which ARE the best in the world.

I currently pay over $500 a month for my $5000 each, 10,000 family deductable health insurance.  This means that I essentially pay for everything out of pocket. We have the policy so that if something catastrophic happens we don’t go broke. We also have it so that if there is an emergency we can gain admission to the hospital.  Each quarter we argue about dropping the insurance because it is a huge burden on us expense wise. This is a crazy situation where our health care and personal finances are being held hostage by greedy insurance companies and an inefficient health care system.
 
We need a total overhaul of the entire system which eliminates the private for profit insurance system and their obvious conflict of interest with our healthcare needs. We also need controls on the drug companies and their activities and sales practices. This is simply too important to leave in the hands of those motivated simply by profit.
Logged
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5525


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #13 on: January 22, 2010, 07:35:02 PM »

And what not for profit company is standing in line to make the next great advancement in medicine?
As far as who the UN appoints to human rights commissions,I don't take with a lot of faith the ranking they give our heakth care system. Sometimes you need to look for an underlying motive with that bunch.
 Is anyone leaving our country for better healthcare elsewhere? I'll take my chances here.
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15316


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #14 on: January 22, 2010, 07:52:59 PM »

oh alfred....you are going to keep me from blowing things up on Bioshock  Sad


Quote
It is not true that we have the best health care system in the world. We are currently rated number 37 by WHO


before you take WHOs numbers at face value, you need to understand how they come up with those numbers.  here is a reasonably good insight.
http://smartgirlnation.com/2009/06/popular-ranking-unfairly-misrepresents-the-us-health-care-system/

they also rank us higher in infant mortality, but fail to take into account high risk pregnancies that would not even make it to term in other countries.  they do not take into account the fact that we try to save all infants born alive regardless of gestation, while other countries like GB have a cut off age.  they add war dead into live expectancy calculations.


Quote
Pharmaceutical companies are making out like bandits and spending huge amounts of money to hawk expensive drugs to you and me that most of us don’t need.


they do make money.  they are a business.  it would be foolish to spend billions developing new drugs if you were not going to make money.  most of us may not need some of these drugs, but when we do need them, it sure is nice that they are there.  low use drugs are going to cost more than high use drugs.  that's why other countries do not allow some of these drugs to be used in their national  health care plans.  for instance, there are drugs for breast cancer that are very expensive, but effective in some forms of breast cancer.  GB has determined that the cost/benefit does not justify the use of those drugs.  what if it were your wife that needed that expensive drug, but she was not allowed to have it?

Quote
Hospitals, Specialists and equipment manufacturers are also driving up the costs. The reason that there is a shortage of Doctors is because they are all doing specialist work where they can charge huge sums of money while the General Practitioner can’t do so as easily. Equipment manufacturers are pushing advanced equipment that is rarely


yes, that stuff is expensive.  would you like to have a GP diagnose you child with a possible brain tumor but have to wait 6 weeks for an MRI and then not have a neurosurgeon available to take it out?  would you think it was to expensive then?


Quote
The reason that there is a shortage of Doctors is because they are all doing specialist work where they can charge huge sums of money while the General Practitioner can’t do so as easily


one of the reasons we have so many specialists is because of the malpractice problem.  there are quite a few GPs and NPs that do a fine job, but the moment they are presented with anything that might be more than a cold, they refer to a specialist.  if it's broken bone, off to the orthopedic doc.  a cut goes to a reconstructive surgeon.  stomach ache to the GI doc. if they don't do that, they risk being sued if anything goes wrong.  money is a factor, but those docs would not exist if not for the volume of work.

Quote
I think that our government is quite capable of running a top notch health care system if we let it. Our fire and rescue first responders are operated by our government and so is our military both of which ARE the best in the world.


first responders belong to city, county, and state governments.  many are still volunteer.  our military is the best in the world as long as the feds don't mess in it to much.  remember the "peace" dividend.  remember what carter did to it?  the feds decide what equipment they will fund and often the do it based on special interests of the state they represent.  is that the way you want your medical run?
they already run medicare and it's broke.
besides, the military is a constitutional job of the feds.   health care most assuredly is not.

Quote
I currently pay over $500 a month for my $5000 each, 10,000 family deductible health insurance.  This means that I essentially pay for everything out of pocket. We have the policy so that if something catastrophic happens we don’t go broke. We also have it so that if there is an emergency we can gain admission to the hospital.


you would gain admission to a hospital regardless of your insurance status.  insurance costs are a problem.  in fact, insurance is a problem.  we have taken market forces out of health care. if we bought health care the way we buy groceries, the cost would come down.  the only thing people might want to carry is catastrophic coverage.  cash payments for care would bring competition and bring down cost.  because everyone thinks they are owed coverage through their jobs, cost are high.  you are paying for things you and your family will never use so that risk is shared.
why do i pay for Viagra, pregnancy, and infertility treatments?  why do you pay for paps and mammograms?  why are drugs covered?  they are another thing that would cost less if there were consumer competition.  

i'll give you an example of how insurance costs us all:  a few years ago i had something done.   it was elective and it required a prescription device.  i have really go coverage and didn't ask any questions.  only later did i find out that the thing i spent 10 dollars on, would have cost me 500 dollars if i'd paid out of pocket.  would i have paid the 500?  maybe, maybe not..  thing is...someone who didn't have that coverage is paying what i did not.

there is nothing that keeps states from doing any kind of heath care plan they want.  some states have massive plans, other do not.  look to your state if you want them to spend money on health care.  if i don't like what your state does, i'll be sure not to move there.  
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
alfred
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 420


Location: Loveland Colorado USA


WWW
« Reply #15 on: January 22, 2010, 09:06:41 PM »

OK you don't trust the WHOs stats, then what numbers do you look at? Where are folks getting the idea that our health care is the best? And even if we accept that idea, over 75 million of us don't have coverage so what does that do for them. Or folks like me who pay a boatload for access and still pay out of pocket for everything?

I never said to remove the profit motive entirely, I said that the payment system (insurance companies, HMOs) needs to be not for profit. Many people seem to be concerned that some govt bureaucrat is going to make life and death decisions for them and keep them from getting the care or the drugs that they need. Well that is what is happening right now with the insurance companies. You don’t get it unless they say it is OK. And make no mistake their job is to deny you any expenditures/treatments that they can.

I had a knee surgery denied me by my insurance company even though my knee was completely locked.  The hospital actually cancelled the surgery the night before because the insurance company said to. I had a very heated conversation with them that evening and put up my credit card to get it done. So there was some Insurance bureaucrat making my health care decisions. The doctor went to bat for me and got them to pay for some of it eventually.
Folks talk about an open market system but how does that work when I can’t even find out what stuff costs. I still don’t know what I paid for that meniscal surgery several years ago. The hospital and various physician and specialist invoices just seemed to keep coming and half of the time I didn’t even know what they were for.

Yes the drug companies should be allowed to make a profit but they also need regulation. Personally I think that they should not be allowed to make campaign contributions or to advertise directly to the public to start with. Obviously people who develop ideas should profit from their intellectual property.

Actually many people do go to other countries for healthcare. Have you heard of Canadian Pharmacies, Indian surgeries, or Mexican treatment centers? Why do these exist? It is because of better access or cheaper price or both. Unfortunately in some cases there is less oversight or regulation but that wouldn't have to be the case here.


I am not talking about getting rid of good doctors, hospitals and treatments or about having substandard care, and I think that we all agree that Tort reform would be a huge step in the right direction. I am talking primarily about the payment/delivery system and better regulation of the Pharmaceutical companies. The outcome would be better healthcare and better access to healthcare. Less red tape for hospitals doctors and patients so that they can get on with the business of healing.
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15316


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #16 on: January 22, 2010, 10:13:15 PM »

Quote
OK you don't trust the WHOs stats, then what numbers do you look at? Where are folks getting the idea that our health care is the best? And even if we accept that idea, over 75 million of us don't have coverage so what does that do for them. Or folks like me who pay a boatload for access and still pay out of pocket for everything?

i don't know that we are the best.  i think there are countries that are at least equal in care.  i can not think of any that are better.  can you?  where do you get the 75 million number?  no doubt the numbers have gone up, but last i heard, the number of working poor uninsured was about 12 million.  the other uninsured either have not taken advantage of available programs (mostly state) or have chosen not to have insurance.  

one way to fix your problem would be to give you more choice in your insurance. see last post.


Quote
I never said to remove the profit motive entirely, I said that the payment system (insurance companies, HMOs) needs to be not for profit.

some HMOs are non-profit.  Kaiser is one.  there are catholic-other church hospitals and services that are non-profit.  why would a company like an insurance company run a non-profit business?  what would be their motivation?  why would people invest in them?  what happens in the years when there is no profit made...when there is a loss?  insurance is a business, not a charity.

the difference between you being denied something through your insurance and the government running things is that you have choice.  if what you want is important enough to you, you can pay out of pocket and get it.  you can take your insurance company to court.  some companies have arbitration. your own story makes the point.  

 with the government, you get what they give you and have no choice.  in england, you can buy private insurance to cover what the govt will not, but it's very expensive and will not cover pre-existing conditions.  my sisters SIL has a history of breast cancer in her family.  knowing that govt care might be limited if she got breast cancer, she pays for an expensive policy so that she can get that care if she ever needs it.  she pays twice for her care.

Quote
Yes the drug companies should be allowed to make a profit but they also need regulation.

drug companies are already heavily regulated.  the spend billions in research and then years getting through the FDA process.  they have a limited time to make that money back before they lose their patent and the drug can go generic.  for every drug that comes to market, there are dozens that were researched and went through trials only to be denied by the FDA.  money lost.


Quote
Have you heard of Canadian Pharmacies, Indian surgeries, or Mexican treatment centers? Why do these exist

they exist for a couple of reasons.  one is that there is less oversight.  who has done the research to see if they are effective?  the other is that they let market forces work.  you pay cash for that care and the cost is less.  they also have less overhead.  they don't pay 100's of thousands in malpractice insurance every year.

the payment/delivery system sucks.  i think we covered that.  until we can get people to stop expect ion big benefit packages with their jobs, the system will continue to suck.  if the last example of the power of the unions was our example, i think there is little hope of that.  in the meantime, we can do tort reform and give people better choices in how they choose insurance.  a large part of the cost of your insurance is in state mandates.  once again, we need to pay attention to what our states are doing.  you can get your cost down and have what you need if you make your own people accountable first.   when is the last time you researched what your state is costing you in insurance mandates?  

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
ayyon2157
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 107

Location: Northeast Indiana, USA


« Reply #17 on: January 22, 2010, 10:54:32 PM »

Hello Kathy:

     Please don't consider me a "smarty pants" but I have what I consider to be a fair question.

     I assume that in your military career that you had considerable experience with Navy and/or Marine medical care, and were in a position to judge it.  Were you satisfied with it or did you choose to go to a civilian hospital or physician where you could pay for it yourself? Is military medical care a fair example of what the government would provide under a single payer system?

     Unfortunately due to some bad personal experiences, there is almost no civilized country that I wouldn't grade as providing better medical care than ours.  I realize that opinion is an exception, and that most people who survive our treatment are satisfied with it.

ayyon2157
Logged

William H. Michaels
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15316


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #18 on: January 23, 2010, 12:00:05 AM »

it was good care and i provided some of it.   grin

i understand where you are going with this, but i don't think you can make the comparison.  in the military you have a young, healthy, and physically fit population.  also a relatively small population.  they are not expensive to care for when we are not at war.  in addition, the military has control over much of the behavior of it's members.    even so, the military has shut down many of it's hospitals and clinics.  anyone stationed away from a major military facility is now treated by civilians, as are their families.  the military administers it's health care within it's own structure.  even though the money comes from the feds, the decisions on care and facilities are (for the most part) made by the military.

if you go to a single payer plan, you are talking about 300 million people of various ages and states of health in one system.  the bureaucracy alone would be monstrous.  

a better comparison would be to medicare/medicaid.  while medicare provides good care, it is broke.  because it does not cover costs well, and the paperwork is a nightmare, many doctors no longer take it.  

we don't have to guess at the results of single payer.  we have examples.  canada with around 23 million has long waits for care, tests, and treatment.  in many cases, they send patients to the US for care that is not available to them.  GB has a disaster in the making.  they have long waits even in the ER.  they have rationed care and drugs.  they have outdated hospitals and equipment. the NHS is the 3rd largest employer in the WORLD and much of that is bureaucracy.  

in this country, if you need something like a triple bypass, you will get it in days..at the most.  in england, you can wait weeks, sometimes admitted to a hospital so you don't die (hopefully) while you wait  for a surgeon.  drugs that we consider standard of care here, are not available there.  on it goes...and they are only covering around 63 million people.

why would our government want to do this when they can see the results?  i think it has nothing to do with health care.  it has to do with government control.  as much as i detest these loony progressives i know they are not stupid.  there is nothing in your life that can't be controlled in the name of health care and saving money if they are in control of it.

why not fix what needs to be fixed?  and again, if this is so important to people there is nothing that keeps states from doing it.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Mason
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 398


Location: Marietta, GA


« Reply #19 on: February 02, 2010, 11:03:39 AM »

This health care bill introduced was complete bunk.  It amounted to nothing more than a government take over of 17% of our economy.  The fact they left out tort reform and fair trade across state lines is proof enough.  Of course how can you expect a bunch of lawyers to reform and limit lawsuits.

It's a dead bill and any politician who continues to push it will be committing political suicide.  Fortunately some if not most of the current administration is so arrogant they are going to slit their own throat over this.  Good for us.

Obama in his state of the union address actually said, he did not take on health care for political popularity.  That statement proves he knows we don't want it but was going to do it anyway.  Obama and our current administration need to realize they work for us and should be doing what WE want.  I actually hope they stay the arrogant course and experience a bloodbath in the November mid terms.

We the people have spoken and overwhelmingly do not approve of a government take over of our personal health.  God bless the good folks of Massachusetts for once again standing up against an oppressive tyrannical government.  Because they used muskets the first time they were able to do it at the polls this time.   
Logged

Former beekeeper until March....maybe next year...RIP
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.696 seconds with 21 queries.

Google visited last this page December 15, 2014, 09:22:49 PM