Healthcare reform

[StrangeSox]

Where is your line? What exact freedoms are you willing to give up so the government can make things "better"? I hear a lot of s*** from people who are willing to turn their lives over to the government, but I am curious for you all to start answering your own questions?

 

Speech?-no

Religion?-no

Movement?-limited exceptions (do you have a problem with passports?)

Property?-no, unless you consider property taxes theft/ government control. Then, yes.

 

Now, what's the rational basis for allowing government to provide fire, police, EMS, infrastructure, schools, food and drug safety, military protection, etc. but not a health care insurance option in this case or even an NHS-style system? Why are your freedoms not being stolen, why are you not "turning [your] lives over to the government" for those services?

 

[southsider2k5]

Why'd you keep that in your back pocket when the previous administration implemented illegal phone taps in our country?

 

/thread jack

 

It was wrong then. Next nitpitck.

[Texsox]

The vision of what each of us have of the future of health care in this country must be so dramatically different. Listening to the public, I think some believe the Doctors will be forced to close their offices and come work for the some giant government run assembly line of health care. Tens of thousands of closed Doctor offices across the landscape. Doctors closing their practices and selling real estate or becoming Monavie distributors. On the other side, I think some believe we'll have an express lane into seeing a Doctor, all tests will be performed the same day, and all the negatives will disappear.

[Rex Kickass]

Where is your line? What exact freedoms are you willing to give up so the government can make things "better"? I hear a lot of s*** from people who are willing to turn their lives over to the government, but I am curious for you all to start answering your own questions?

 

Speech?

Religion?

Movement?

Property?

 

I'd just like to know where you get the erosion of freedom from allowing a government run insurance option to compete with the private insurance industry. Britain nationalized its healthcare and it still has private health care and private health insurance options. That isn't even what's close to being proposed here. At its scariest, what's been proposed doesn't even compare to the parallel systems that France offers - who also has a thriving private medical industry.

 

Maybe you can spell it out more clearly, exactly which freedoms I'm abridged by allowing a government run insurance program to offer me affordable health care? Because I have a hard time jumping from being able to afford going to the doctor to no longer being able to be free to assemble.

[Texsox]

Obviously I agree with Rex. Seems like a goal that everyone should agree with. I get the feeling that if a President issued a Kennedy-esque challenge like landing, and returning, a man on the moon, the opposition party would do everything they could to thwart the efforts.

[vandy125]

Here is an LA Times story about some common ground that is happening between the parties:

Healthcare Common Ground

 

The consensus proposals include such popular ideas as barring insurance companies from denying coverage to people with preexisting injuries and illnesses, cutting insurance coverage off when a policyholder gets sick and imposing a lifetime cap on benefits.

 

Some of the ideas that enjoy bipartisan support are expanding coverage for preventive medicine, providing new incentives for small businesses to offer insurance to their workers and making it easier for individuals to comparison-shop for policies.

 

[BigSqwert]

FactCheck.org sets the truth on a wide spread email regarding H.R. 3200.

 

A notorious analysis of the House health care bill contains 48 claims. Twenty-six of them are false and the rest mostly misleading. Only four are true.

[StrangeSox]

Hey kap:

 

Claim: Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.

 

False. That’s simply not what the bill says at all. This page includes "SEC. 152. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION IN HEALTH CARE," which says that "[e]xcept as otherwise explicitly permitted by this Act and by subsequent regulations consistent with this Act, all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services." However, the bill does explicitly say that illegal immigrants can’t get any government money to pay for health care. Page 143 states: "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States." And as we’ve said before, current law prohibits illegal immigrants from participating in government health care programs.

[mr_genius]

rather than screaming "Death Panels!" "Immy-gants!" Etc., which has been so bloody effective over the last month or so.

 

It's a legitimate debate as to whether it is the role of the US government to insure all foreign nationals. Your attempts to marginalize the debate with a lame "err immygants!" is very Palin like, my friend.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

It's a legitimate debate as to whether it is the role of the US government to insure all foreign nationals. Your attempts to marginalize the debate with a lame "err immygants!" is very Palin like, my friend.

Except that, as has been detailed here, no one in Congress is suggesting doing that, and nothing in the bills put forth so far do that either. Its 100% straw man.

 

Now, if it were in there somewhere, then I'd agree its a legitimate debate, and I'd not want to see it happen.

 

[mr_genius]

I'm really failing to understand why your option, not giving illegals the option to Purchase (to buy goods or services with money), is better. Because, as you said, we end up paying for their care in the end when they go to emergency rooms and don't pay. Isn't it better for everyone if they're paying into the system?

 

And, really, why shouldn't they be allowed to? What's so morally outrageous about this?

 

Are you intentionally ignoring the fact that what they pay into this system will only cover a fraction of the costs associated with covering them? If they want insurance, they can buy it from a private company. It is not the role of the US government to provide health insurance to the globe. You guys are out of your f***ing minds.

[BigSqwert]

From the factcheck link I provided a bit earlier:

 

Claim: Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.

 

False. That’s simply not what the bill says at all. This page includes "SEC. 152. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION IN HEALTH CARE," which says that "[e]xcept as otherwise explicitly permitted by this Act and by subsequent regulations consistent with this Act, all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services." However, the bill does explicitly say that illegal immigrants can’t get any government money to pay for health care. Page 143 states: "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States." And as we’ve said before, current law prohibits illegal immigrants from participating in government health care programs.

[mr_genius]

Except that, as has been detailed here, no one in Congress is suggesting doing that, and nothing in the bills put forth so far do that either. Its 100% straw man.

 

Now, if it were in there somewhere, then I'd agree its a legitimate debate, and I'd not want to see it happen.

 

No, there is a good chance that the Democrats will try to get non US citizens covered by some US public plan. It's is a legitimate point to bring up as they are still 'crafting' this bill. Why is this so hard for you guys to understand?

Edited August 31, 2009 by mr_genius

[BigSqwert]

No, there is a great chance that the Democrats will try to get non US citizens covered by some US public plan. Why is this so hard for you guys to understand?

Do you have me on ignore?

[mr_genius]

Do you have me on ignore?

 

Great, I hope what you posted is in the actual bill.

[StrangeSox]

Are you intentionally ignoring the fact that what they pay into this system will only cover a fraction of the costs associated with covering them? If they want insurance, they can buy it from a private company. It is not the role of the US government to provide health insurance to the globe. You guys are out of your f***ing minds.

 

I'd imagine they'd pay the same rates as anyone else purchasing insurance through the HCE, either a public or private plan. They're not providing it to them for free or at a reduced cost.

 

Keep tilting at windmills.

 

edit: the entire point of insurance is that you only pay a portion of the costs of some major medical problems. It's collectivized risk.

Edited August 31, 2009 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

No, there is a good chance that the Democrats will try to get non US citizens covered by some US public plan. It's is a legitimate point to bring up as they are still 'crafting' this bill. Why is this so hard for you guys to understand?

 

Because its not in any proposal, any bill, or being advocated by anyone in a position of power or influence?

[mr_genius]

I'd imagine they'd pay the same rates as anyone else purchasing insurance through the HCE, either a public or private plan. They're not providing it to them for free or at a reduced cost.

 

Keep tilting at windmills.

 

The public plan is going to heavily subsidized, there is no way around it. The plan has to insure people whom are 'high risk'. People whom the private insurers charge a lot for as have actuaries that determine the probabilities of cost. I'm not even against helping insure people in need, but I'm against this madness that non US citizens should be able to buy into this.

[kapkomet]

"Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."

 

Key words: AFFORDIBILITY CREDITS. That's all this talks about. There's not a damn thing in here about coverage. Nothing. They are covered, or more specifically, there's nothing in the bill to NOT deny them COVERAGE.

 

all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services."

 

Same section - services covered by this act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics... ok, looks to be like they get their coverage.

 

Besides that, one swipe of the pen, they're all legal. Poof. Argument over.

[mr_genius]

Because its not in any proposal, any bill, or being advocated by anyone in a position of power or influence?

 

 

 

[StrangeSox]

The bill does not forbid them from buying health insurance. It does not guarantee them coverage, provide them coverage at a reduced cost, or give them an unfair advantage in any way.

[mr_genius]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/27/hea...ants/index.html

 

Immigrants living illegally in the United States could be mandated to have health insurance under the proposed health care reform bill but would be ineligible to receive subsidies to afford such coverage, a report from the Congressional Research Service says.

 

The report, prepared by the nonpartisan policy research arm of Congress, provides a close reading of the treatment of noncitizens in the House bill on health care reform, HR 3200.

 

While the report found that federal subsidies to obtain health coverage would be restricted to U.S. citizens and legal residents, it also noted that the bill does not specify a citizenship verification system, something that critics say creates a loophole for undocumented immigrants to receive subsidies anyway.

 

The report, released Tuesday, "undermines the claims of the president and others that illegal immigrants would not be covered under the House version of the bill," Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, told CNN.

 

The bill specifically bars illegal immigrants from receiving payments, but opponents of the reform say that without verification, the system is open to abuse.

 

Of course, US citizens only... but we aren't checking to see if anyone is not a US citizen.

 

 

[kapkomet]

The bill does not forbid them from buying health insurance. It does not guarantee them coverage, provide them coverage at a reduced cost, or give them an unfair advantage in any way.

So they walk right in, and get the same "rights" as you and me, right off the bat, without even being a citizen. I'm glad that's swell and ok with you. We better call the masses to get here before this thing passes. What's a few billion more people for us to cover? Oh, except they won't get "affordability credits". LMAO.

[mr_genius]

The bill does not forbid them from buying health insurance. It does not guarantee them coverage, provide them coverage at a reduced cost, or give them an unfair advantage in any way.

 

Why would a bill forbid anyone form buying health insurance? That makes no sense. Now, they shouldn't be able to get the US government public program, which makes perfect sense.

[Y2HH]

The bill/bills/multiple bills being 'crafted', 'drafted', or otherwise 'created' is/are/will be riddled with double talk and extremely vague language (such as in the examples above), with words such as, otherwise, explicit, except, related, without regard, extraneous, etc., which translates to the following: It can mean whatever they/we/us/them want it to mean.

 

That's why it's longer than War and Peace.

 

That's why for every fact check there is a counter fact check because the language contradicts itself with meaningless babble, for example, affordability credits, whatever the f*** they are.

 

Suck on that straw man.

Edited August 31, 2009 by Y2HH