http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8Y2sAdDw98
Printable View
I heard that on NPR. I liked that line about getting past campaign mode.
not sure how I take it. he is saying health care needs changes and there are some decent things within the bill that wouldn't be bad. no coverage for pre-exisiting conditions...not sure how I feel about this. I am young and don't have any issues but for someone that has something already, that could be an issue. I could understand if you are looking for an extended warranty on a vehicle and you the transmission is shot and motor is blown, but for people it is a little bit different.
The bottom line comes down to he said he would be the 41st senator.
the dems have already said they are going to back off the issue and still try to get something together but more along the lines of non-controversial issues...problem there is always controversy on everything.
the also said they wouldn't be passing the exact senate bill in the house...they wouldn't even come close to having the votes for it.
I trust dems like I trust my little puppy around a starving coyote but I really don't think all of them can come to an understanding and stand together even if they have to take it in the ass a little from each other.
health care is all but dead IMO. Obama wants it and wants to salvage whatever he can to make good to his promise but the people don't want it and the senators and congressman most definitely don't want to risk not getting re-elected to help obama and his agenda. what they don't know is the people are going to continue to be pissed because our hard earned money is being given away in the hundreds of billions, they want to tax us more...on our own health of all things, 10% of people don't have jobs and most people don't feel like the .gov is doing a damn thing to help create jobs like they promised.
I think operation wetback needs to go into effect. that will create jobs.
google it and you will see.
Ok Sniper, I'll google that and check it out.
As for healthcare reform, what they were trying to get through was a losing proposition all the way around. It would have been incredibly expensive and would not have made medical care more accessable to anyone. The way I saw it, they were attempting to force people to purchase insurance from private companies. This situation was a lot like immenent domain in my mind. Completely unconstitutional.
Ironically, the left is as pissed at Obama as we are, but for different reasons. I have some pretty liberal family members (in laws) and they are of the opinion that a Canada style system is the reform we need. Of course, I disagree on that point. But one point I actually do agree with them on is that the bill they were trying to get through would have served only to enrich insurance companies.
We do need reform to our system. The socialist solution (Obama) is not it though.
I'm not so sure that it would enrichen insurance companies. When you have to write EVERYBODY, you can't choose your desirable market that will allow you to make money and serve your customers.
Just take Katrina for example. Insurance companies weren't required to write insurance on anyone but those that they wanted to. Katrina caused several insurance companies to go insolvent and go out of business. When you HAVE to insure everyone, there is no protection for you in the event of a disaster, not to mention that forced insurance violates and undermines the whole idea behind insurance in the first place.
Just imagine what would happen if health insurance was forced and there was an actual outbreak of something like swineflu on the scale that the media always scared you into believing. Having to pay for the medical costs of all those people, just to have them die and stop making payments would ruin the entire industry.
My mother lives in Canada. You know what they do if they need something sooner than the system says they'll get it? They come down here. There are a few good things about that system, but there are (almost) always a few good things about any system. Does there need to be some health care reform? Undoubtedly! I've dealt with enough crap from insurance companies and hospitals to know. But Obamacare ain't it. I really fail to understand why anyone would think that the Government would be the outfit to run a program like that. They screw programs up like rabbits procreate, and then sit there looking wide eyed and confused when people tell 'em what they think about how things are run. [Rant1]
We've been over this before a few times. Less regulation and take the insurance out of health care. Health care and insurance are two different concepts that shouldn't be mixed.
Less regulation in which side? Healthcare or insurance?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart
Great question. I meant the health industry. When I say less regulation, I don't mean back alley abortions and bathtub births either. I (and a lot of people) like to use lasik eye surgery as a great example. Health insurance doesn't pay for it, so people price shop it, thus pushing the prices down each year, as the technology gets better and better. At the same time, it is not so heavily regulated that they have to jump through hoops and can't keep their prices down for the public. That industry is a perfect example of how the health care industry should be handled.
Excellent analogy Stuart. And to add some more food for thought: How many people have lost their eye sight due to Lasik surgery? How many people have lost their lives or have had other health issues (septic shock, etc) in regards to abortions? Wonder if a parallel could be made between the regulations of those two industries and the price points of insurance...