Cheaper nationalized plan --> less profit for inssurance companies (oops to your fake buddies) --> more money in the pocket of people --> people will be able to pay for the rationed parts which already exist.
nationalized heathcare and dentistry
- Thread starter Strikeout13GB
- Start date
Cheaper nationalized plan --> less profit for inssurance companies (oops to your fake buddies) --> more money in the pocket of people --> people will be able to pay for the rationed parts which already exist.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2008
- Messages
- 1,154
- Reaction score
- 73
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
Insurance companies don't have a problem with Medicare because the government basically UNLOADED the WORST demographic group (from an actuarial stand point) for the insurance companies. Imagine if there was NO MEDICARE. Oh no! Grandmom got denied by her insurance company! And no other insurance company wanted to insure her because of her pre-existing condition (over 65)! Your sky is falling mentality is quite amusing, but what else can you expect from a "deather"
"Private inssurance reform"
? OCEAN is tearing up. You would be a gem for Fox News.[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hx5zR0E6Y7s[/YOUTUBE]
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 377
- Reaction score
- 3
You might want to read the fine print of the senate proposal. I called the offices of my state senators earlier this week. Both aids I spoke with said the way the bill is currently worded, you can keep the private plan of your chosing IF it meets government stipulations. As it reads right now, basically only HMO plans will meet these requirements meaning a significant number of Americans could be forced to change their insurance and more importantly their providers.who's talking about taking away all private insurance? you can keep your better plan with or without the public option. you are for whatever glenn beck says you should be for...this is reform, but you consider it a "left" shift" so you are against it. national bankruptcy? our national debt is 11.7 trillion and our gdp is 8.7 trillion. oh yeah bush added 4 trillion to the national debt, the most of ANY president in US history. that's what Obama is stuck with, and he's been in office for like 2seconds and people are like "hey why isn't it fixed yet?!" ?????
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
Stipulations as in regulations? Regulations that are currently at each individual state level? Sure, allow competition across state lines without a federal level regulation and see what will happen. ALL the insurance companies will be based in the ONE state with the MOST relaxed stipulations and when you do have a problem, you won't have your own state's insurance commisioner/regulator to go to for help. Now YOU will have to cross state lines for your recourse. BIG BUSINESS needs to be regulated because the sole purpose of their existence is to MAKE AS MUCH MONEY as they possibly can.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2006
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 7
We sure wouldnt want a private company to make as much money as they can would we? I mean, thats free market. I smell a..sniff...snifff..a sociali...........
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2006
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 7
I guess it was a good time for Mr. Obama to take a 10 day vacation. When are you liberal idiots going to wake up and realize this man is burying this country?
AP sources: $2 trillion higher deficit projected
Higher number over next decade could spell trouble for Obama in Congress
.
updated 1 hour, 44 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The Obama administration expects the federal deficit over the next decade to be $2 trillion bigger than previously estimated, White House officials said Friday, a setback for a president already facing a Congress and public wary over spending.
The new projection, to be announced on Tuesday, is for a cumulative 2010-2019 deficit of $9 trillion instead of the $7 trillion previously estimated. The new figure reflects slumping revenues from a worse economic picture than was expected earlier this year. The officials spoke only on the condition of anonymity ahead of next week's announcement.
Ten-year forecasts are volatile figures subject to change over time. But the higher number will likely create political difficulties for President Barack Obama in Congress and could create anxiety with foreign buyers of U.S. debt.
Earlier this week, the White House revealed that it expects a budget deficit for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30 to be nearly $1.6 trillion. That figure was lower than initially projected because the White House scratched out $250 billion that it had initially added to the budget as a bank rescue contingency. The administration ultimately did not ask Congress for that money.
Still that number, together with the 10-year projection, represents a huge obstacle for an administration trying to undertake massive policy overhauls in health care and the environment.
Forced to raise taxes?
Economists predict a slow recovery from the recession, further testing Obama's goal of cutting the deficit to $512 billion in 2013. Even as he seeks higher revenues to pay for new climate change and health care measures, the president could face pressure to increase revenues or make deep spending cuts to tame the deficit.
Earlier long-term estimates released in February and May relied on now-outdated projections of economic growth. Then, the White House predicted the economy would shrink by 1.2 percent this year, but the economy shrank 6.4 percent in the first quarter, the worst in nearly three decades.
In its earlier projections, the White House said the deficit would be manageable if it slides to 3 percent of gross domestic product. Earlier projections barely met that standard even after relying on optimistic assumptions like the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan costing $50 billion a year instead of the $130 billion budgeted for 2010.
Now, the deficits could easily exceed 4 percent of GDP, even after cost-cutting efforts or new revenues claimed in Obama's budget.
Such deficits have always prompted Congress and the White House to take politically painful steps to curb them, such as former President Bill Clinton's tax-heavy 1993 deficit reduction plan. A companion effort by Obama could force him to break his promise to not raise taxes on individuals making less than $200,000 a year.
AP sources: $2 trillion higher deficit projected
Higher number over next decade could spell trouble for Obama in Congress
.
updated 1 hour, 44 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The Obama administration expects the federal deficit over the next decade to be $2 trillion bigger than previously estimated, White House officials said Friday, a setback for a president already facing a Congress and public wary over spending.
The new projection, to be announced on Tuesday, is for a cumulative 2010-2019 deficit of $9 trillion instead of the $7 trillion previously estimated. The new figure reflects slumping revenues from a worse economic picture than was expected earlier this year. The officials spoke only on the condition of anonymity ahead of next week's announcement.
Ten-year forecasts are volatile figures subject to change over time. But the higher number will likely create political difficulties for President Barack Obama in Congress and could create anxiety with foreign buyers of U.S. debt.
Earlier this week, the White House revealed that it expects a budget deficit for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30 to be nearly $1.6 trillion. That figure was lower than initially projected because the White House scratched out $250 billion that it had initially added to the budget as a bank rescue contingency. The administration ultimately did not ask Congress for that money.
Still that number, together with the 10-year projection, represents a huge obstacle for an administration trying to undertake massive policy overhauls in health care and the environment.
Forced to raise taxes?
Economists predict a slow recovery from the recession, further testing Obama's goal of cutting the deficit to $512 billion in 2013. Even as he seeks higher revenues to pay for new climate change and health care measures, the president could face pressure to increase revenues or make deep spending cuts to tame the deficit.
Earlier long-term estimates released in February and May relied on now-outdated projections of economic growth. Then, the White House predicted the economy would shrink by 1.2 percent this year, but the economy shrank 6.4 percent in the first quarter, the worst in nearly three decades.
In its earlier projections, the White House said the deficit would be manageable if it slides to 3 percent of gross domestic product. Earlier projections barely met that standard even after relying on optimistic assumptions like the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan costing $50 billion a year instead of the $130 billion budgeted for 2010.
Now, the deficits could easily exceed 4 percent of GDP, even after cost-cutting efforts or new revenues claimed in Obama's budget.
Such deficits have always prompted Congress and the White House to take politically painful steps to curb them, such as former President Bill Clinton's tax-heavy 1993 deficit reduction plan. A companion effort by Obama could force him to break his promise to not raise taxes on individuals making less than $200,000 a year.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
Socialist? Sorry, but you need to do better than that.
After all that bailout of the financial markets, how you can continue to cheer on an unregulated free market is beyond ...sniff....snifff...stupidi.... Oh, and about your insurance not passing the stipulations, I'm sure it wasn't because it was so good and covered tooooo much.
As for your free market stance:"I didn't say that private insurance reform isn't a good idea. Reign in those premiums" yet you continue to cheer lead for a free market model for the very same insurance companies. So which one is it? Your critical thinking is pretty weak. Sorry
The bottomline is that most current dental inssurance plans don't cover that many dental procedures, so I wouldn't mind seeing them make less profit or go out of business. The health care reform will save the average American a lot of money, some of which they could spend on dental care. It's better than letting the average guy go bankrupt just so that Ocean's buddies could continue making millions. The rich will always pay for the best dental care they need. The average guy will also be able to spend some of the money on dental care, if someone halts the robbery of inssurance companies.
That's why the phrase, "Private inssurance reform", coming out of this guy's mouth made me crank up.
You should be delusioned to think such people's ideas are the result of critical thinking. People like Ocean and Joe the Plumber (They are pretty much the same type) are tools who think that if they support the elite and the corporations, one day they will get to live like them, without keeping in mind that they are just a dentist or a plumber, and not a politician.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 465
- Reaction score
- 5
Thanks for misconstruing my argument (typical liberal ploy).
I'll paint it crystal clear for you: I didn't say take away medical coverage for those people. My point was that this poor woman's case will be multiplied a million times over if the same practices are applied under Obama's plan...care will be rationed due to cost.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 465
- Reaction score
- 5
Stimulus plan: approx $1 trillionwho's talking about taking away all private insurance? you can keep your better plan with or without the public option. you are for whatever glenn beck says you should be for...this is reform, but you consider it a "left" shift" so you are against it. national bankruptcy? our national debt is 11.7 trillion and our gdp is 8.7 trillion. oh yeah bush added 4 trillion to the national debt, the most of ANY president in US history. that's what Obama is stuck with, and he's been in office for like 2seconds and people are like "hey why isn't it fixed yet?!" ?????
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/stimulus_bill_trillions/2009/01/28/176063.html
Obama Healthcare reform: $1 trillion (depending on final bill).
Ok, so let's do the math. Bush added $4 trillion in 8 years (according to you).
OBAMA ADDS $2 TRILLION IN SEVEN MONTHS.
Bush's spending was out of control, and uncharacteristic of a conservative, which is part of the reason why the country has moved to the left. With Obama wanting to expand social and welfare services, expect him to outpace Bush.
Again the question is: Who's going to pay for this?
CBO(? I think they've said it) and experts say increasing taxes of those making more than $250k will not be enough to pay for this...so I guarantee middle class taxes will go up AND small business taxes (in the form of payroll taxes) will go up if this bill goes through.
More taxes means less disposable income, means prolonged recession.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
Nice way to gloss over reality.
Bush took a budget surplus and instantly turned it into a budget deficit: Analogy: a plane that was flying upwards is now nose diving because the fuel was cut. (tax cuts)
Obama takes over in the midst of "The Great Recession" and literally a few months after Hank Paulson had declared that the financial sector was on the verge of collapsing (crashing) "within days" (not weeks or months) and all you can say is he is spending too much? Do you think the nose-diving plane will correct its nose dive and level off without some form of Herculean effort; especially if the Treasury Secretary of the Bush administration was warning that the nose dive was about to become a crash landing? According to you, the answer is (and always will be) tax cuts or "let's cut off more fuel!"
And please stop with the name calling (socialist etc.); you should have stopped doing that at the playground.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2008
- Messages
- 1,154
- Reaction score
- 73
1) 1 trillion....thats over 10 years
2) according to me? hahaha yes its a dental student conspiracy. google it.
3) bush 4 trillion and we get the great recession, obama 30 billion and we get healthcare for all americans?
4) i'm guessing that you didnt mind how the war was/is getting paid for. or how the bailout gets paid for. but healthcare for everyone??!! FORGET THAT! hahaha get out of here!
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 465
- Reaction score
- 5
Did I have a petit mal seizure and lost 5 minutes of my life? I never said tax cuts would save the day, but alluded that CUTTING SPENDING would.
Did I just call someone a socialist? Even if I had, it's an appropriate label for someone who wants to tax all to benefit all. Last time I checked, it doesn't rank up there with idiot, ahole or any other "name calling". Shows how thin skinned liberals are if you're afraid of addressing the issue for what it is:socialism.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
Amazing how those who argued for the efficacy of Bush anti-terrorism efforts by the "no terrorist acts on US soil since 9/11" reasoning, continue to deny the same reasoning for how much worse (a potential catastrophic worldwide financial meltdown) it could have been had Obama actually "cut spending" instead (as you continue to "allude" to).
That's too funny...name calling on a relative scale. Again, you should have stopped doing that in grade school so please grow up.
Socialism as in Medicare? Puleeze stop with the McCarthyisms (ooops! I called you a naammme!)
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 465
- Reaction score
- 5
I said according to you because I didn't bother to fact check it. I gave you the benefit of the doubt. I think its funny how you take every statement made to you as an accusation.
Regarding your #4, yes you would be guessing about that. Great non-sequitur argument...tell me how does the cost of foreign policy or cost of a domestic economic issue relate to the cost of health reform? But if want to know my opinion, the war at the time seemed just, but apparently the facts are different now aren't they? And I was never a fan of the bailout. You're obviously an ideologue...you've formulated your argument and opinion against a non existent position that I've seemed to take and can see only through a narrow, dogmatic prism.
I'm actually getting tired of this conversation since the liberal minded are clouding this whole argument. Because my (and other people's views) are right or center right, you all assume the same things of us:
*we are all for indiscriminate tax cuts (historically economic growth followed tax cuts in the Reagan/Bush years)
*we think Bush was the greatest president ever (he obviously isn't)
*Iraq was a glorious war to get into (all evidence atthe time seemed right)
*we want free and unbridled uncontrolled capitalism or our banks and insurance companies (untrue)
*we are all cold hearted and selfish bastards for not wanting to be taxed more (studies shop conservatives give more to charity than liberals)
*we are all idiots for believing one person's assesment of the end of life counseling. (Sarah Palin does not run the party)
These assertions run through this whole thread and paints a really broad stroke of the conservatives here. This is the third time I'm finding that I've had to fend off an argument I didn't make.
Ultimately, I think that you really fear the truth of the matter:
*You can't accept the fact that redistributing wealth from the top to everyone else in society is in fact socialism.
*the Democrats/left/liberals have engaged in a disingenuous argument as to how much this will cost (which is my primary concern)...the CBO and other critics says its going to cost more, and I believe them more than I believe the people pushing it. And when cost is the criticism, you revert to "Oh well , what about Bush!" Bush is over. Get over it.
*if Democrats are so concerned about cost, why is there no tort reform as part of the bill? Simple explanation is that they are protecting the trial lawyers who profit from these lawsuits (ie John Edwards).
*I don't think America would unanimously be happy about abortions and euthanasia funded by taxpayer dollars.
*the proponents for this upheaval here for the most part are dental students. You have no idea what it is like to run a small business...making payroll, managing employees. You as the dentist are the last to get paid, after you've paid your taxes, overhead, and employees. When you see where the money goes, you'll be just as defensive against taxes as the rest of us practicing dentists are.
When was the last time you worked for a poor person? Or someone on welfare? Never I'm sure. Poor people do not create jobs. Poor people do not create wealth. The middle and upper class create jobs therefore wealth through small business. 70% of people in this country are employed by small busniesses. Obama should be propping up small business, not companies like GM. The $64 billion bailout could have been 64,000 small business loans of $1 million each. Propping up big business, then trying to extend social services to the poor leaves out the people that matter the most- the middle class business owners (most of us dentists).
I've said it before and I'll say it again...if the bill goes through in its current form or similar, count on middle class and small business taxes going up. But it seems Obama and the Democrats have totally mismanaged the debate, so I think the whole bill will ultimately crash and burn.
Here's the icing on the cake...are there really 40-50 million uninsured? This report exposes inconsistencies with Obama's claim:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=18125
According to some experts there are truly only between 8-14 million. A public option for 14 million at half the cost is a hell of a lot more palatable than the current plan.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 465
- Reaction score
- 5
You spending money hand over fist in this economy or are you cutting back? How is our country going to be fixed by spending more money than we actually have?
This is funny...you still haven't showed me where I called Obama a socialist. And second, I'd love to hear your explanation as to why the label "socialist" is pejorative. Senator Bernie Sanders might disagree with you there.
I have no problem with Medicare. I believe that government should have a small hand in social services. However Obama's plan is a major and revolutionary upheaval of the system for the worse.
But hey you brought in McCarthy! Your view is clear now....you think calling someone a socialist bears the same amount of disloyalty as being called a communist! I can see why you're so crabby with this amount of self loathing. I think you should pop open another history book and read up on the difference between communism and socialism.
Let me help you out:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Socialism refers to various theories of economic organization advocating state, worker or public ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by free and equal access to resources for all individuals with an egalitarian method of compensation.[1][2][3] Socialism is not a political system; it is an economic system distinct from capitalism
Obama's checklist:
Public takeover of commercial enterprise (GM): check!
Taxing the wealthy and redistributing wealth via welfare services to the poor: check!
Ok so he's not a socialist. We'll call it Diet Socialism, Socialism Light, or maybe Capitalism, with Nutrasweet. That works for you?
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2006
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 7
Veterans Wrongly Told They Have Fatal Disease
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
associated press
CHARLESTON, W.Va. — Former Air Force reservist Gale Reid received a letter from the Veterans Affairs Department that told her she had Lou Gehrig's disease, and she immediately put herself through a battery of painful, expensive tests. Five days later, the VA said its "diagnosis" was a mistake.
Letters were sent to 1,864 veterans about disability benefits for those with ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig's disease, and a "small number" have contacted the VA indicating they received the letters in error, VA spokeswoman Katie Roberts said Monday night.
However, the National Gulf War Resource Center said Reid was among at least 1,200 veterans who received the letter, even though they hadn't been diagnosed with the illness. Veterans were initially suspicious, but still went through the pain not knowing whether they had the degenerative disease, which typically kills people within five years.
The Resource Center said at least 2,500 letters informing veterans of disability benefits for ALS sufferers were sent, with almost half a mistake. Roberts said the number sent was not that high and that only less than 10 people had called to say they had gotten an ALS benefits letter but didn't have the disease.
The veterans group president Jim Bunker said it stood by its figures.
Those who received the letters have undiagnosed neurological disorders, according to the Gulf War veterans group, which provides information, support and referrals about illnesses to people who served in the military.
No one knows for sure exactly how many letters were mailed to veterans treated at VA hospitals and how many were a mistake.
"VA is immediately reviewing the individual claims files for all the recipients of this letter to identify those who received the notification in error," the VA said in a statement Monday night.
Former Army Sgt. Samuel Hargrove cried Sunday after opening his letter.
"I can't even describe the intensity of my feelings," said the father of two from Henderson, N.C. "With so many health issues that I already have, I didn't know how to approach my family with the news."
So, at first, he didn't. Hargrove later discovered the mistake after talking with fellow veterans in the resource center and online. He was angry, as is Reid.
"I've been through a week of hell, emotionally, physically and financially," she said.
Denise Nichols, vice president of the resource center, said her group has received calls and e-mails from panicked veterans in Alabama, Florida, Kansas, North Carolina, West Virginia and Wyoming.
"Our fear was this could push somebody over the edge," said Nichols, who worried the news could lead already fragile veterans to commit suicide. "We don't want that to happen."
Jim Bunker, president of the veterans group, said he talked to someone at the VA and was told the mistake was caused by a coding error. The VA uses more than 8,000 codes for various diseases and illnesses and veterans with undiagnosed neurological disorders, which can range from mild to severe.
ALS is a rapidly progressive disease that attacks the nerve cells responsible for controlling voluntary muscles.
Nichols said she suspected something was amiss because some of the veterans she knew who received the letters did not exhibit any symptoms. Hargrove said he became suspicious because the letter didn't come from his doctor, and Reid said she sought a second opinion even though she believed the letter wasn't the right way to inform patients of a diagnosis.
The veterans groups notified the VA of the problems late last week, and the agency was in the process of calling every person who mistakenly received a letter, Bunker said.
The VA has taken some heavy criticism already this year. In June, Congress questioned the agency over botched colonoscopies at medical centers in Florida, Georgia and Tennessee that may have exposed 10,000 veterans to HIV and other infections. Last month, the VA Medical Center in Philadelphia disclosed that the number of cancer patients receiving incorrect radiation doses had risen to 98 veterans over a six-year period.
The Gulf War veterans group is urging the VA to reimburse any veteran who scheduled additional tests with civilian doctors. Reid said her tests cost about $3,000, though it may take weeks before she finds out how much her private insurance will cover.
"We are trying to work with the VA because we realize it was an error and they were trying to do something right for the people who were diagnosed with ALS," Nichols said. "Basically this was a good effort that ended badly."
And whats to come once these buffoons try to do this with 350 million americans. Complete ineptitude. Oh, and Obama is a socialist. You have to be kidding yourselves not to agree with that. Share the wealth baby.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
associated press
CHARLESTON, W.Va. — Former Air Force reservist Gale Reid received a letter from the Veterans Affairs Department that told her she had Lou Gehrig's disease, and she immediately put herself through a battery of painful, expensive tests. Five days later, the VA said its "diagnosis" was a mistake.
Letters were sent to 1,864 veterans about disability benefits for those with ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig's disease, and a "small number" have contacted the VA indicating they received the letters in error, VA spokeswoman Katie Roberts said Monday night.
However, the National Gulf War Resource Center said Reid was among at least 1,200 veterans who received the letter, even though they hadn't been diagnosed with the illness. Veterans were initially suspicious, but still went through the pain not knowing whether they had the degenerative disease, which typically kills people within five years.
The Resource Center said at least 2,500 letters informing veterans of disability benefits for ALS sufferers were sent, with almost half a mistake. Roberts said the number sent was not that high and that only less than 10 people had called to say they had gotten an ALS benefits letter but didn't have the disease.
The veterans group president Jim Bunker said it stood by its figures.
Those who received the letters have undiagnosed neurological disorders, according to the Gulf War veterans group, which provides information, support and referrals about illnesses to people who served in the military.
No one knows for sure exactly how many letters were mailed to veterans treated at VA hospitals and how many were a mistake.
"VA is immediately reviewing the individual claims files for all the recipients of this letter to identify those who received the notification in error," the VA said in a statement Monday night.
Former Army Sgt. Samuel Hargrove cried Sunday after opening his letter.
"I can't even describe the intensity of my feelings," said the father of two from Henderson, N.C. "With so many health issues that I already have, I didn't know how to approach my family with the news."
So, at first, he didn't. Hargrove later discovered the mistake after talking with fellow veterans in the resource center and online. He was angry, as is Reid.
"I've been through a week of hell, emotionally, physically and financially," she said.
Denise Nichols, vice president of the resource center, said her group has received calls and e-mails from panicked veterans in Alabama, Florida, Kansas, North Carolina, West Virginia and Wyoming.
"Our fear was this could push somebody over the edge," said Nichols, who worried the news could lead already fragile veterans to commit suicide. "We don't want that to happen."
Jim Bunker, president of the veterans group, said he talked to someone at the VA and was told the mistake was caused by a coding error. The VA uses more than 8,000 codes for various diseases and illnesses and veterans with undiagnosed neurological disorders, which can range from mild to severe.
ALS is a rapidly progressive disease that attacks the nerve cells responsible for controlling voluntary muscles.
Nichols said she suspected something was amiss because some of the veterans she knew who received the letters did not exhibit any symptoms. Hargrove said he became suspicious because the letter didn't come from his doctor, and Reid said she sought a second opinion even though she believed the letter wasn't the right way to inform patients of a diagnosis.
The veterans groups notified the VA of the problems late last week, and the agency was in the process of calling every person who mistakenly received a letter, Bunker said.
The VA has taken some heavy criticism already this year. In June, Congress questioned the agency over botched colonoscopies at medical centers in Florida, Georgia and Tennessee that may have exposed 10,000 veterans to HIV and other infections. Last month, the VA Medical Center in Philadelphia disclosed that the number of cancer patients receiving incorrect radiation doses had risen to 98 veterans over a six-year period.
The Gulf War veterans group is urging the VA to reimburse any veteran who scheduled additional tests with civilian doctors. Reid said her tests cost about $3,000, though it may take weeks before she finds out how much her private insurance will cover.
"We are trying to work with the VA because we realize it was an error and they were trying to do something right for the people who were diagnosed with ALS," Nichols said. "Basically this was a good effort that ended badly."
And whats to come once these buffoons try to do this with 350 million americans. Complete ineptitude. Oh, and Obama is a socialist. You have to be kidding yourselves not to agree with that. Share the wealth baby.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2006
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 7
White House projects bigger deficits, debtEstimates foresee a cumulative $9 trillion deficit from 2010-2019
King Obama is going to have to raise taxes on the middle class. He might want to take some advice concerning the health care legislation from Leiberman. When the American people are majority against this thing, and members of your own party think you need to wait until we exit this recession, you would think this guy might take a step back.
King Obama is going to have to raise taxes on the middle class. He might want to take some advice concerning the health care legislation from Leiberman. When the American people are majority against this thing, and members of your own party think you need to wait until we exit this recession, you would think this guy might take a step back.
77% of Americans support a public health insurance option:
http://minnesotaindependent.com/424...ce-77-percent-of-americans-like-public-option
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2006
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 7
For your reading pleasure
http://www.gallup.com/poll/121997/americans-healthcare-reform-top-takeaways.aspx
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2006
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 7
....and just why do you think the ADA is a against a public option concerning dentistry....http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=659868
Bottom line, the govenment is unable to run a health care program. They prove it time and time again with their other social programs.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2008
- Messages
- 1,154
- Reaction score
- 73
thanks for bold and larger font, and if it wasn't for the addition of color I might have mistaken this forum for a town hall meeting.
well, i guess we'll just have to see how this plays out in real time. also, i'm kinda done with polls and projections because they aren't facts.
other presidents (who shall remain nameless for the sake of Ocean's feelings) raised taxes on the middle class too...but they didn't have the cajones to do it honestly, so he raised inflation to generate more tax $$$$ at the expense of the american dollar. but at least if taxes get raised, this time we'll end up with the small consilation prize of healthcare for all.
you pick and choose which stats, polls, and facts you like and sting them together in a narrative and try to sell it as fact. it's getting kinda embarrasing.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2006
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 7
Im not embarrassed. You embarrassed? Now why would I post anything positive about Obama or the left half? Ok, Obama is a great family man, and seems like he has a great personality. Does that make you feel better?
Do you have any "stats" you'd like to share besides the bland "77% of americans are for a public option". I mean, thats like saying 80% of americans are for alternative environment friendly energy. Its how you get there and the details that is the problem. Have any tests this week Oracle?
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2006
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 7
This thread is definitely worth reading with respect to the health care debate.
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=659940
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=659940
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2000
- Messages
- 2,938
- Reaction score
- 658
Nice survey whose "parent company" funding is by ........... none other than moveon.org
Unbiased, sureTeaching point here. You gotta be able to CRITICALLY evaluate published data to see if it's "good" meaning unbiased, valid and reproduceable by others or basically junk meaning biased and non-reproduceable by others
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
Lame article by someone who only can see out of his right eye.
For example, his closing paragraph:Those protesters in those town-hall meetings have served notice that Mr. Obama's charismatic moment has passed.
Served notice? Which one is he referring to? The shouters or the gun-toting bullies? I'm sure non/very few of them actually voted for him in the first place.
Once again, the belief in that American exception that set this nation apart from other lands is re-emerging.
Yeah it happened already when Obama was elected. Or was that the "exception" to the "exception?"
Health care is the tip of the iceberg.
You bet it is, Keep up the status-quo: Rising premiums, decrease reimbursements, greater wealth separation (already worse than the 1920s)
Beneath it is an unease with the way the verdict of the 2008 election was read by those who prevailed.
Huh? You mean grown men crying? Or the unease in the losers who are now "rising" to a show of American exceptionalism? Remember Bush's "mandate?" That was with a smaller margin by popular vote or electoral
It shall be seen whether the man swept into office in the moment of national panic will adjust to the nation's recovery of its self-confidence.
Panic after 8 years of Bush, 6 of which came with a Republican Congress? (no complaints of the need for a balance of power/checks and balances then by the same shouters and gun toting crowd I'm sure.
Ocean, you need to do better.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2008
- Messages
- 1,387
- Reaction score
- 5
Nice survey whose "parent company" funding is by ........... none other than moveon.org
Teaching point here. You gotta be able to CRITICALLY evaluate published data to see if it's "good" meaning unbiased, valid and reproduceable by others or basically junk meaning biased and non-reproduceable by others
Haha, yeah that's like Olbermann saying that he has the highest rated cable news program... if you disregard all of Fox. It's just pitiful, when the left isn't making up statistics to fit their arguments, they're finding a way to blame Bush for everthing.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2008
- Messages
- 1,154
- Reaction score
- 73
the spice girls had the highest grossing concert of 2007, but that doesnt really make them the best musicians of that year right?
ratings do NOT = quality journalism
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 465
- Reaction score
- 5
From the horse's mouth...Howard Dean: politicians are *scared* of trial lawyers, that's why tort reform is not in the bill! By scared I think he means "protecting". So I guess Dems want to tax the rich, except the trial lawyers suing physicians and dentists!
http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=Gd8zprIrSU
http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=Gd8zprIrSU
Former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, a medical doctor who served as governor of Vermont, said at a town hall meeting on Tuesday night that Democrats in Congress did not include tort reform in the health care bill because they were fearful of "taking on" the trial lawyers.
"This is the answer from a doctor and a politician," said Dean. "Here is why tort reform is not in the bill. When you go to pass a really enormous bill like that the more stuff you put in, the more enemies you make, right? And the reason why tort reform is not in the bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers in addition to everybody else they were taking on, and that is the plain and simple truth. Now, that's the truth."
"This is the answer from a doctor and a politician," said Dean. "Here is why tort reform is not in the bill. When you go to pass a really enormous bill like that the more stuff you put in, the more enemies you make, right? And the reason why tort reform is not in the bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers in addition to everybody else they were taking on, and that is the plain and simple truth. Now, that's the truth."
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2008
- Messages
- 1,387
- Reaction score
- 5
Oracle we meet again
Olbermann, wow, that is some quality journalism there. I am starting to warm up to his logic though. I can call myself the best applicant in Texas if I exclude everyone with DAT scores and a GPA higher than mine!
Haha, that guy's a clown. He should have stuck with ESPN. Nevermind, he sucked at that too!
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2003
- Messages
- 8,393
- Reaction score
- 37
Stick to the issues, please. Personal attacks are out of bounds and will be dealt with accordingly. If you're wondering whether I'm talking to you, I probably am.
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2003
- Messages
- 8,393
- Reaction score
- 37
Wait, wait. You're calling the biggest cigarette tax hike in history "honest"? If someone can find me a more regressive tax hike at any point in American history, I'll give you a dollar. As long as you have five more, you buy a pack of cigarettes with it.
Uh..."raised inflation"? Is there anyone with formal economics experience who wants to do the honors here? If not, I'll be happy to.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 465
- Reaction score
- 5
Good call. I can't believe I missed that. Credibility of debate with present company= 0
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2006
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 7
Damn aphistis, would it be a personal attack to tell berkeley to change his status? Im not sure what he does...maybe an ACORN guy bombarding this site......but he is definitely not a dentist. In some post I thought maybe he was a pre-dent, but I missed it by 20 years. Regardless, Good points concerning the oracle.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2006
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 7
This is such a great point. Man, I had not learned anything today until I read this. I feel so enlightened.
Tell me grasshopper, what is quality journalism, and who do you regard as a quality journalist?
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
Geeze Ocean, you've missed way more than 20 years. I'm sure aphistis has a very good idea of what I do and I would also hope aphistis doesn't fall for your childish baiting. Meanwhile, keep up with your "ditto-head" arguments.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
Maybe you should understand the question before you ask it? Old Chinese saying: A fool can ask more questions than ten wise men can answer.
Last edited:
You gotta wonder whether some dentists have difficulty finding patients because of this type of an attitude toward everyone, or is it the government's fault that their businesses are failing (And by that I mean Obama's admin, not that of Bush). If you're wondering whether I'm talking to you, I probably am. Well, afterall, a successful dentist with a real life (not talking about your sad life, Ocean) wouldn't be attacking people all over SDN, and keep accusing others of being a predent. Everyone who disagrees with you must be a predent.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
I got a real good laugh when Ocean thought I was a predent
. Don't like the message? Kill the messenger! Goes along with the name calling and silly presumptions typical of the ditto-head mentality.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2008
- Messages
- 1,387
- Reaction score
- 5
And everyone who disagrees with you is a "right wing lunatic" that believes terrorists were the ones behind 9/11.
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2003
- Messages
- 8,393
- Reaction score
- 37
At risk of calling out rob, Oracle, and berkeley: is any of you going to make an attempt at responding to the objections I raised in my last post, or just jeopardize your accounts by continuing to bash Ocean after I already warned about it?
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
As a moderator, I hope you will remain objective in your monitoring of this thread given your perceived political views.
Straight from the deep end of the Ocean:
"Tell me grasshopper"
"maybe an ACORN guy bombarding this site"
"When are you liberal idiots going to wake up"
"I smell a..sniff...snifff..a sociali........... "
"Oracle, dont you have lab work you should be working on?"
"after you and your liberal buddies have had your daily kool aid."
"Are you fucccc__ing kidding me?"
"Due not feed the troll robhmnt"
"Stop feeding troll. Recommend ignore list"
"This was before the idiots drank the kool aid"
"you are another one of those planted conservative riot promoting idiots right"
"Not my intention to say a drug addict does not have rights. My intention was more to give Oracle a hard time"
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2003
- Messages
- 8,393
- Reaction score
- 37
Your concerns are noted. There's been plenty of back-and-forth in this entire thread, thus the post I made a few hours ago. If y'all can't argue nicely (that goes for both sides of the issue), I'll have to put this thread down the garbage disposal.
Additionally, thank you for changing your profile to more accurately reflect your current professional status (note to Ocean and for general consumption: berkeley did so on his own, not in response to any request of mine.)
I hope Oracle gets back soon. I'm looking forward to seeing his response to my earlier post.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 0
Thank you. I'll do my best to keep this on the up and up and treat everyone with the respect we all deserve. Thank you again and Best Regards.
Ok, I'm leaving this thread. Too sad we didn't hear from you when he was bashing others. In my opinion, you are using your power to shut down the opposing voice.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2006
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 7
Go back and re-read this thread. You will find very rarely do I give a direct personal attack (obviously in jest I kid around with oracle, and I assume he can detect my tone). Time and time again I post pertinent articles, news, polls, etc..etc.. with some opinion wrapped into it, and time and time again its a PERSONAL attack on Ocean. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy them, and have very thick skin, but certainly dont feel that my posts are even close to the personal attacks of the others. Dont put me in that club.
With respect to the troll, there is a troll, and I have done my best to ignore him. Anyone who posts a breakdown about how 9/11 was fabricated by George Bush and his cronies speaks for itself. Once that post made it on this "health care" thread my mind was made up.
I have tried to keep my posts relevant to the healthcare arguement. Some are not.
Aphistis, it was wise to keep you arguement to Oracle in a normal sized font and color. It tends to get him of topic.
BACK TO THE DEBATE:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/200...ical-obamas-health-care-plan/?test=latestnews
Are you kidding me? ABC can give OBama a complete day of infomercial, and is now pulling this antic. This is unbelievable.
