BF2S Forums Your Life, Your Choices

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Right now the lobbyists have paid big money to stop reform and the public option. I would bet that there is a corelation between the amount of money and how loud this debate will get. These people don't care about anyone but themselves. The don't care about truth or justice or the health of the American public. They will yell, cajoul, lie, spread misinformation and threaten until they get a no vote or in their minds it would even be better to get no vote at all.

Everyone in American that jumps on the disinformation bandwagon is a fool and if you are going against your own self interests to ensure you or your families future then you are stupid too.... might as well tie a bow around yourself because you just been bought and paid for. Ship of fools. If this push for reform fails, these crooks will be laughing their asses off at the stupidity of the American public.




Went to see the captain, strangest I could find,
Laid my proposition down, laid it on the line.
I wont slave for beggars pay, likewise gold and jewels,
But I would slave to learn the way to sink your ship of fools.

Ship of fools on a cruel sea, ship of fools sail away from me.
It was later than I thought when I first believed you,
Now I cannot share your laughter, ship of fools.
Grateful Dead - Ship of Fools

Cute lyrics. 
Actually there are many that in the drug industry that want this.  Did you know that lobbiests from the medical field are in bed with Obama in support of his Socialist Medicine program?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/0 … 54833.html

Yell, cajoul, lie?  Really?  It would have been so much better to blindly pass this bill like the 'OMG we gotta do this now... BTW you've just put your grandkids in debt' budget? Sorry pal.  I've got a healthcare plan.  It's bad ass too.  I also pay dearly for it.  I wouldn't have it any other way and I don't want the government fucking with it.  I've seen how government runs thing -quite shittily I may add.  ATG provided examples, I'm sure there more out there. 

Sorry to get "all wee weed up" , but I don't want my government telling me what to do.  It works the other way around here in the US.  This is not as you stated 'reform'.  Your 'reform' is actually a marxist presidnet that is attempting to rebuild the nation in his image.

Sing those lyrics again -cause its really you thats on the boat with Obama, Pelosi, Reid and the rest of the fools.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Right now the lobbyists have paid big money to stop reform and the public option. I would bet that there is a corelation between the amount of money and how loud this debate will get. These people don't care about anyone but themselves. The don't care about truth or justice or the health of the American public. They will yell, cajoul, lie, spread misinformation and threaten until they get a no vote or in their minds it would even be better to get no vote at all.

Everyone in American that jumps on the disinformation bandwagon is a fool and if you are going against your own self interests to ensure you or your families future then you are stupid too.... might as well tie a bow around yourself because you just been bought and paid for. Ship of fools. If this push for reform fails, these crooks will be laughing their asses off at the stupidity of the American public.




Went to see the captain, strangest I could find,
Laid my proposition down, laid it on the line.
I wont slave for beggars pay, likewise gold and jewels,
But I would slave to learn the way to sink your ship of fools.

Ship of fools on a cruel sea, ship of fools sail away from me.
It was later than I thought when I first believed you,
Now I cannot share your laughter, ship of fools.
Grateful Dead - Ship of Fools

Cute lyrics. 
Actually there are many that in the drug industry that want this.  Did you know that lobbiests from the medical field are in bed with Obama in support of his Socialist Medicine program?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/0 … 54833.html

Yell, cajoul, lie?  Really?  It would have been so much better to blindly pass this bill like the 'OMG we gotta do this now... BTW you've just put your grandkids in debt' budget? Sorry pal.  I've got a healthcare plan.  It's bad ass too.  I also pay dearly for it.  I wouldn't have it any other way and I don't want the government fucking with it.  I've seen how government runs thing -quite shittily I may add.  ATG provided examples, I'm sure there more out there. 

Sorry to get "all wee weed up" , but I don't want my government telling me what to do.  It works the other way around here in the US.  This is not as you stated 'reform'.  Your 'reform' is actually a marxist presidnet that is attempting to rebuild the nation in his image.

Sing those lyrics again -cause its really you thats on the boat with Obama, Pelosi, Reid and the rest of the fools.

Its very possible that reform would not be in your personal self interest, just like its not in the interests of insurance companies to see any changes. If that's your circumstance then I would say you stance is rational. But I think that there is a large segment of the population that is being swayed by disinformation and deciding the issue against their self interests.

Anyway, wait till you lose your job, or your money in the stock market or some other personal tragedy be falls you and you are kicked off of your kick ass healthcare plan, then tell me how great it is to be laid bare in front of the invisible hand. TRy to live of your principles in that kind of situation. I would suggest that you broker those possiblities i to your decision before you cast aside these reforms. And if you think that reforms aren't necessary then look no further than the current wall street fiasco. The healthcare market is broken and it needs to be fixed, its in the interests of "private" profiteers that no changes be made, Those guys are paying money to professional liars to muddy the water when in fact its not in the publics interest that the status quo be maintained. I still think a majority know that refoirms are necessary and support it. Most people are waiting to see what is in the final proposal.

If I were to place a bet, I would bet that the health care reforms get passed. I became a little more confident of it when Joe lieberman decided to open his mouth and call for delays... now that guy is always on the losing end and the side he picks is sure to go down. My guess is that people will start to get angry at the disinformation just like they finally got pissed about "intelligence support" for the Iraq war. A lie only delays the inevitable, it won't carry the day. PBO has to know that if this fails then he is out in 2012 so I would expect an all out frontal assault by him if he wants to be reelected. It would be nice to see PBO give two-face-Joe a kick in the head. Those are the stakes as I see it.


BTW the ship of fools reference I used pretains to people who are easily swayed by misinformation to the point where they don't even look after their own self interests. These people are victims waiting to happen.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Its very possible that reform would not be in your personal self interest, just like its not in the interests of insurance companies to see any changes. If that's your circumstance then I would say you stance is rational. But I think that there is a large segment of the population that is being swayed by disinformation and deciding the issue against their self interests.

I agree to an extent, but there is the same, if not larger blind following for this "plan".  I even argue that the majority of Obamites are blind followers. 

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Anyway, wait till you lose your job, or your money in the stock market or some other personal tragedy be falls you and you are kicked off of your kick ass healthcare plan, then tell me how great it is to be laid bare in front of the invisible hand. TRy to live of your principles in that kind of situation. I would suggest that you broker those possiblities i to your decision before you cast aside these reforms. And if you think that reforms aren't necessary then look no further than the current wall street fiasco. The healthcare market is broken and it needs to be fixed, its in the interests of "private" profiteers that no changes be made, Those guys are paying money to professional liars to muddy the water when in fact its not in the publics interest that the status quo be maintained. I still think a majority know that refoirms are necessary and support it. Most people are waiting to see what is in the final proposal.

Who says I haven't had any 'personal tragedies'?   I will not elaborate here, but yes I've been without health insurance and had to pay out of pocket.  No, it doesn't feel good putting a cat scan a credit card.  I won't argue that changes are needed, but may of the provisions included are aimed with the end game of having a totally government run healthcare system.  I am dead set against this.  I also find it hard to stomach anything the Supreme Community Organizer has to say about this.  After all, he's got family abroad living in poverty which he does absolutley nothing for.  Yet I'm supposed to believe that he is going to take care of me and my family? 

Diesel-dyk wrote:

If I were to place a bet, I would bet that the health care reforms get passed. I became a little more confident of it when Joe lieberman decided to open his mouth and call for delays... now that guy is always on the losing end and the side he picks is sure to go down. My guess is that people will start to get angry at the disinformation just like they finally got pissed about "intelligence support" for the Iraq war. A lie only delays the inevitable, it won't carry the day. PBO has to know that if this fails then he is out in 2012 so I would expect an all out frontal assault by him if he wants to be reelected. It would be nice to see PBO give two-face-Joe a kick in the head. Those are the stakes as I see it.

I wouldn't take that bet as I think it will pass too.  The SCO had the handbrake pulled on him, so he sends out his minions for these re-education.. er 'townhall' meeting.  I don't think people will be angry like the disinformation (WMD) like Iraq.  Why?  Those angered from the 'disinformation' by in large all ready took issue with Bush.  They merely needed a reason, any reason to be rabid.  As to 2012?  He better get started on the amnesty for illegeals..

Diesel wrote:

BTW the ship of fools reference I used pretains to people who are easily swayed by misinformation to the point where they don't even look after their own self interests. These people are victims waiting to happen.

Thank you, but I still thnk Obama is friggin fleet admrial of the ship of fools...

Agree to disagree I guess. The real losers if reform goes through will be insurance companies who will lose some or all of their profits and unless I missed it there is no god given right to a profit and no right to set up a market that causes pain and suffering. The insurance companies will be the only losers if reform is passed. I think if you looked at other countries where national health care systems were set up, they had politcal fights when implementing those systems but by in large national healthcare has become entrenched and it works well in other countries. In fact, it works so well that private insurance here are afraid to death that once people learn what a convenience it is to go see a doctor without out of pocket expenses that the insurance companies will be doomed. Although the doom scenerio is over blown because all that is really doomed is the very fat profit margins that these insurance companies reap on the backs of sick people who they send to the reaper. They are profiteers of death and sickness like wolves in the wild, except we live in a democracy where the rules of the wild are modified to our benefit.

The toughest crowd to get on side will be the elderly who don't seem to want to support the reform out of fear for medicare. Not that they hate medicare, but because they fear that under the present proposal that medicare will be rolled into a new national health care system that will get its legs cut out from under it by future administrations. Its a valid fear in a country where practically every republican administratoin has talked about reforming social security or doing away with it entirely. I can't blame the elederly for being wary of changes now. PBO should really come out and say definitively medicare will not be touched and will remain a seperate program. Perhaps in teh future when govt healthcare programs become as proven and as effective as medicare is then and only then should harmonization programs be on the table.

History has shown in other countries that going after a national health care program, once established, is political suicide. In Canada, in the 1980s conservatives tried to turn people against medicare there by reducing funding and creating long line ups... Many "horror" stories are the result of actions by people who want to get rid of national healthcare trying to cut the legs out from under the system. If national healthcare reform passes here in the US, when the Republicans get back in I would expect to see healthcare horror stories being manufactured by the stripping of funding... just like how there is always talk of trying to go after social security. How ironic is it that the warnings about how bad a national healthcare system would be come from the political group that would be in charge of its funding who would have a choice as to whether to scuttle the program or not. The public shouldn't be wary of national healthcare, but they should be wary of how strong the commitment of the Republicans is to destroy these needed reforms. IMO is private health insruance companies start going belly up, then the money to lobbyists will cease and the great fight to stop healthcare reform will be nothing but a tiny footnote in history. Its necessary, it would be good for the economy, it would be good for national security, it would be good for the country, it will happen eventually but sooner would be better than later.



BTW did you know that during the negotiation of the free trade agreement with Canada and then again with NAFTA, that the US asked Canada to give up its national healthcare system because it gave Canada an unfair economic advantage... but if national healthcare doesn't work then why bother asking to have it dismantled. The current public debate is being bought and paid for by insurance companies with tons of money looking out for their own interests. I'll I'm saying is that everyone else should do the same. For me and my family I would welcome the future economic security that a govt run program would bring.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Agree to disagree I guess. The real losers if reform goes through will be insurance companies who will lose some or all of their profits and unless I missed it there is no god given right to a profit and no right to set up a market that causes pain and suffering. The insurance companies will be the only losers if reform is passed. I think if you looked at other countries where national health care systems were set up, they had politcal fights when implementing those systems but by in large national healthcare has become entrenched and it works well in other countries. In fact, it works so well that private insurance here are afraid to death that once people learn what a convenience it is to go see a doctor without out of pocket expenses that the insurance companies will be doomed. Although the doom scenerio is over blown because all that is really doomed is the very fat profit margins that these insurance companies reap on the backs of sick people who they send to the reaper. They are profiteers of death and sickness like wolves in the wild, except we live in a democracy where the rules of the wild are modified to our benefit.

This is a definite agree to disagree.  I believe that a national health care system is simply unsustainable.  I'm sure insurance agencies are freaking out.  After watching how Obama took over the car industry, banks and then attacked wall street -I don't blame them.  Any industry is fair game by this administration.  I really don't see the insurance agencies in the same light as you.  No one is requiring you to have health insurance. 

Diesel_dyk wrote:

The toughest crowd to get on side will be the elderly who don't seem to want to support the reform out of fear for medicare. Not that they hate medicare, but because they fear that under the present proposal that medicare will be rolled into a new national health care system that will get its legs cut out from under it by future administrations. Its a valid fear in a country where practically every republican administration has talked about reforming social security or doing away with it entirely. I can't blame the elderly for being wary of changes now. PBO should really come out and say definitively medicare will not be touched and will remain a seperate program. Perhaps in teh future when govt healthcare programs become as proven and as effective as medicare is then and only then should harmonization programs be on the table.

So how does our elected leaders cramming this down our throat treat them?  They are called 'angry mobs' and 'racists'.  They also know that nationalized health care leads to rationing. God help it us it passes and then they get sick from something deemed too expensive to treat.  Obama himself said it... "take the pill".

Diesel_dyk wrote:

History has shown in other countries that going after a national health care program, once established, is political suicide. In Canada, in the 1980s conservatives tried to turn people against medicare there by reducing funding and creating long line ups... Many "horror" stories are the result of actions by people who want to get rid of national healthcare trying to cut the legs out from under the system. If national healthcare reform passes here in the US, when the Republicans get back in I would expect to see healthcare horror stories being manufactured by the stripping of funding... just like how there is always talk of trying to go after social security. How ironic is it that the warnings about how bad a national healthcare system would be come from the political group that would be in charge of its funding who would have a choice as to whether to scuttle the program or not. The public shouldn't be wary of national healthcare, but they should be wary of how strong the commitment of the Republicans is to destroy these needed reforms. IMO is private health insruance companies start going belly up, then the money to lobbyists will cease and the great fight to stop healthcare reform will be nothing but a tiny footnote in history. Its necessary, it would be good for the economy, it would be good for national security, it would be good for the country, it will happen eventually but sooner would be better than later.

BTW did you know that during the negotiation of the free trade agreement with Canada and then again with NAFTA, that the US asked Canada to give up its national healthcare system because it gave Canada an unfair economic advantage... but if national healthcare doesn't work then why bother asking to have it dismantled. The current public debate is being bought and paid for by insurance companies with tons of money looking out for their own interests. I'll I'm saying is that everyone else should do the same. For me and my family I would welcome the future economic security that a govt run program would bring.

So what is Canada's tax rate?  Were you aware that one of the main architects of its health plan has since back peddled saying that things need to be privatized?  Why would the guy who came up with the plan decide it isn't working?  Bottom line is that I'm tired of taxes.  This 'plan' would most certainly raise them.

Guess what ATG - the non-socialised American healthcare system fails pretty damn hard. Any constructive suggestions rather than an ideological rant?

Pug wrote:

Why isn't the gov't more focused on the primary driver of cost - the meds & docs instead?

The system in America for some puzzling reason has led to higher costs than the European model, even though our systems are far less competitive. I just don't get it. For universal cover and comparable standards (superior in the case of say Canada) the per capita cost of healthcare borne by the government in the US is higher than in the socialised nations. Why on earth is this?

Last edited by CameronPoe (2009-08-25 13:17:05)

CameronPoe wrote:

Pug wrote:

Why isn't the gov't more focused on the primary driver of cost - the meds & docs instead?

The system in America for some puzzling reason has led to higher costs than the European model, even though our systems are far less competitive. I just don't get it.

It's quite simple really. The price the companies in the US pay is massively inflated and the system is rife with corruption and waste.

An example I gave in another thread:

Bertster7 wrote:

an American company making pacemakers sells those pacemakers to European healthcare providers for $5000 each. They sell them to US based healthcare providers for $35000.

It has been highlighted by economic experts as being the next probable major financial collapse.

CameronPoe wrote:

Pug wrote:

Why isn't the gov't more focused on the primary driver of cost - the meds & docs instead?

The system in America for some puzzling reason has led to higher costs than the European model, even though our systems are far less competitive. I just don't get it. For universal cover and comparable standards (superior in the case of say Canada) the per capita cost of healthcare borne by the government in the US is higher than in the socialised nations. Why on earth is this?

One more item:
I lived in Canada for four years.  I didn't visit any hospitals while I was there I had a little taste.  Nicer stuff down here.  More technology.  So maybe it's just confidence or something, but I believe the quality of care at least seems better.

But I'm still around after those four years, for what that's worth.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

certain things will never be done if left in the hands of private enterprise alone. national defense, electric power grids, nuclear power, CDC, NASA etc etc. like it or not there are certain things that are in the national interest and the health of citizens and controling the cost burdens associated with runaway health care costs and parasitic insurance companies are one of them.

either the govt is going to set the parameters of your coverage OR a parasitic corporation is going to do it. I fail to see the difference except the govt plan would have cost savings, efficiencies of scale, and you might actually get a say in the coverage through your elected representative and if you lose your job you won't lose your health coverage, and if you get sick and lose your job you won't lose your coverage and go bankrupt.
You don't get any of those with a private corporation. Plus you wouldn't lose coverage at the whim of a bean counter or doctor whoring for some HMO.

I guess I'm baffled at the hypocrisy that if the govt does its evil, and if a private company does it then its some how natural because its tied to some sort of imaginary idea of a free market. Its noble to live and die by your principles, its something completely different to ask others to die them.

I don't agree with PBO on a lot of things. Bailouts are garbage, reappointing Bernanke is garbage, carbon credits are garbage. The only plan that makes economic sense and that would have a real tangible benefit to every citizen is health care reform. My only fear is that PBO has wasting his political capital on garbage and will now lay down on health care. If I were him, the first thing I would have passed is national health care instead of assisting the wall street elite in their raid of the public treasury.

Pretty much.  The Soviet Union worshipped the state, but America worships the market.

One day, we'll wake up as a society and realize that healthcare really is a human right among a civilized society.  Until then, we can pretend the market will fix everything.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

BTW the ship of fools reference I used pretains to people who are easily swayed by misinformation to the point where they don't even look after their own self interests. These people are victims waiting to happen.

Interesting how people think the only ones engaging in misinformation and scare tactics are those who oppose the reform plan being offered.

That in itself is a result of misinformation and scare tactics by the side that wants any reform at any cost.

CameronPoe wrote:

And on a similar-ish note I lived in the US for four months at one point, developed a bad infection in my eye and couldn't afford treatment on the wage I was earning (casual summer labour, 6 day week). I had to go without and it had after-effects that lasted some time. America certainly has the better R+D and technology when it comes to healthcare and for the affluent individual or the individual that has a cast iron secure job with a scheme this works fine. From what I gather, for several million people in the fuzzy zone between affluent and impoverished - the people trying to climb the ladder - their whole lives and those of their families (the wage earners of tomorrow) can be crippled both economically speaking and literally speaking at the drop of a hat. The same holds for those whose schemes are paid for by employers that, in the current climate, have decided to let them go. Socialised healthcare does obviously lead to a certain level of waste, inefficiency and abuse. I think the main difference between European and American thoughts on the issue is that Europeans are prepared to make compromises in the common interest (it's largely cultural I think) whereas in America the self is king. Ultimately it's a trade off between the polar opposites of kickass state-of-the-art treatment for that segment of society that can afford it and largely adequate treatment for all and sundry. My bias, and that's what it is, would lean towards the more social model, if only for the fact that I think it's the morally right thing to do, I pretty much don't notice the pinch of the cost (and I pay private insurance for 'elitist' care also) and i believe in offering a hand up to those trying to break out of the gutter. I believe this in full recognition of the fact that it entails the following a) abuse/overuse, b) far longer waiting lines for those that don't bother to buy private insurance (and the implications that potentially arise therefrom) and c) a lower quality of service for those that don't bother to buy private insurance (and the implications that potentially arise therefrom).

There's clinics for the impoverished, but (and its a big but), there are only a few and do not have the same quality of care from docs, staff, and equipment/facilities.  I think this is Obama's issue in reality.

Too bad you don't speak Spanish, and you have red hair.  You might have been able to be treated for free.  You might think I'm joking about that, but it's true.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healt … posed.html

AAAAHHH more mis-information run!