Where do you stand on health care?

Posted by scurvydog (anonymous) on August 17, 2009 at 9:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I favor corporate like the US has now with some exceptions - we do need to get rid of lobbying and special interest groups, or completely ban them from making contributions to political parties (and this applies across the board, not just the medical industry).

If we can get the insurance and drug companies out of bed with the hospital administrators and politicians, we could see dramatically lower prices for health care.

I won't pretend the system is perfect now. Even those with insurance have claims denied sometimes. But I absolutely do NOT trust our greedy, self-serving government to provide the care. It works in other countries to a degree, but it won't work in America, simply due to the nature of American greed in politics (on both sides of the aisle).

Something needs to be fixed, but the government can't fix it until we fix the government.

Posted by leftys2221 (anonymous) on August 17, 2009 at 10:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

FYI- The government will not be providing any care. When people say they don't trust our "greedy, self-serving government" to have anything to do with insurance it makes me laugh because right now it is provided by greedy, self serving insurance companies.

Posted by Wildbill (anonymous) on August 17, 2009 at 11:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)

There is no simple solution to the health care problem. You shouldn't need an insurance card everytime you go to see the doctor. Insurance should be if you're hospitalized. Doctors shouldn't have to run a thousand tests on someone with a cough just to protect themselves against a malpractice lawsuit. Insurance co-ops might not be a bad idea either.

Posted by scurvydog (anonymous) on August 17, 2009 at 11:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

lefty, maybe you skipped over the part where I said:

"If we can get the insurance and drug companies out of bed with the hospital administrators and politicians, we could see dramatically lower prices for health care."

Where did I suggest the insurance corporations were not also greedy? In fact, I mentioned them first.

Posted by Taxpayer_AL (anonymous) on August 17, 2009 at 1:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

After all the news of the pending healthcare, I believe the American public (especially the seniors) did the right thing in asking questions. It stuck me why were our elected officials trying so hard to push this through without the benefit of even reading the bill. After reading the bill myself, I grew very nervous. I tried to call many of our elected officials, and didn’t really get a response. You will notice our elected officials sure didn’t come to Albert Lea to discuss this with us.

I also thought about the many problems with just about anything overseen by the Government. (I.e. Medicaid, Medicare, the postal service, etc). Each seems too plagued with problems (i.e. misuse of funds, false payments and billing). They spend more and more of our tax dollars, on committee’s and other bureaucratic nonsense than they would just in covering the public.

I also feel that the Government has taken away enough of our personnel freedoms and this is the sure way to Socialism.

We do need to do something about healthcare. But the Government having more access to our financial and medical records, and deciding what our medical care should be is not it.

Posted by Culture_Warrior (anonymous) on August 17, 2009 at 4:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Can anyone spell TORT REFORM?

Posted by Truth (anonymous) on August 17, 2009 at 6:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If the government can't run cash for clunkers why would anyone think they can run 1/7 of our economy. If our health care is so bad why do we create they life saving treatments. Why do people come to the Mayo clinic? Why if single payer is great do people from Canada come here for treatment? If congress thinks this is so great why don't they have to be the first to sign up?

Do we need reform? Yes lets start with Tort Reform. Let's look at not providing care for people who are here illegally. Let's send the bill to their home country. Let us own the policy not the employer. We can take it with us from state to state just like car insurance. Cut state and federal mandates. Yep all are better than scrapping the system and moving to socialized medicance.

Posted by mankind (anonymous) on August 17, 2009 at 10:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Why does this poll have the reform vote split between three categories yet the status quoi has one place to vote. If you add all the votes for change it leads corporate health care by 90-82 tonight.

Posted by MackTheKnife (anonymous) on August 18, 2009 at 7:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

What disappoints me is the source of "health care" is the care of one's health. If Americans as a whole would take better care of their health than we wouldn't have this so-called crisis.

I view it as supply and demand. The demand for appointments at the hospital and clinics has increased over the number of years. Naeve had to expand due to the increased demand which drives up the number of claims, which drives up the premiums.

I wish we had some politicians who had the guts to speak out and say to America, "It's your country and as a group YOU can solve the rising costs of health care by caring about your health." But politicians are afraid to say this because they fear alienating a potential voter. If any potential would speak out on this they would get my vote. Unfortunately I don't have anyone to vote for.

Personally, I don't care for the products that corporate America tries to market to us. Corporate America is more concerned with meeting their quarterly Wall Street earnings estimates or their bottom line if not publically traded. Fortunately I have discovered a company that does manufactures products that are both healthy and flavorable. It has helped my overall health in the four months that I have been a customer.

PS - I am not a Blue Zone person. I have my own "zone" that I consider even better than the Blue Zone project. However I am in favor of most of the life style changes they recommend.

Posted by Truth (anonymous) on August 18, 2009 at 8:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Here is a good story about socialized med and it's effect. Yes it is from Canada. http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2004/09/2...

Posted by leftys2221 (anonymous) on August 18, 2009 at 10:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Corporate American and big business run everything so great...like the housing industry and wall street why don't we let them go ahead and keep at it!

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on August 18, 2009 at 11:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

There you go again leftys2221 giving us your opinion as if it is fact. Let’s look at housing. The housing redevelopment act which was the government telling banks to make loans. Your friend Barren Frank was against fixing this and said there is nothing wrong at Fannie and Freddie Mac. Both of which are owned and run by the government. Both have just asked congress for more money because of all the bad loans the government made. Yet when banks could get out from under the government the good ones did. Don’t forget the government forced all banks onto TARP. Now all but a few have paid it back. Why because government destroys private enterprise. I was against the bailouts of the banks. I was against the bailout of the car industry. Government has no place in business. This is a progressive idea that has led to the ruin of the free market. If you are so against big business why don’t you protest PBS or AmTrack or Fannie Mae. You don’t because it goes against your political bias. Hypocrisy has no bounds when it comes to the liberal left. Now should we talk about cash for clunkers? Only 2% has been paid out. If the government can’t even do this how can they run healthcare. Don’t forget the spendulus. Most Americans want the money back. Yea government is so much better.

One last thing business not the government create jobs. The government tried and now we are at 9.5% and it will keep climbing.

Posted by Wildbill (anonymous) on August 18, 2009 at 1:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree with MackThe Knife, taking care of your body is the best health care reform. Also consider the fact that you probably have insurance on your home and automobile. But, do you go to your insurer when you fix a faucet or light socket, no. Do you go to your insurer when you get an oil change on your automobile, no. So we should be able to go to the doctor for shots or a physical without having to use our healthcare insurance.

Posted by leftys2221 (anonymous) on August 19, 2009 at 8:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

You can't pound any sense into my head? Because I disagree with your OPINION I am senseless? Why don't you try to turn the caps lock off! When did I ever say that the government ran plan was the best and should be the only option. Lets get some real competition for the privately ran companies.

Posted by leftys2221 (anonymous) on August 19, 2009 at 12:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

?

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on August 19, 2009 at 4:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Obviously anybody who has NOT lived in Canada or the U.K. wants this crap, more "free crap from the .gov" it's not free and it is NOT good. I speak from experience I have family members is the U.K. healthcare stinks if you need a kidney transplant you will wait years and I mean many, many years before you get one and that is "if" you get "approved" for it.

They have no choice but to ration care, the numbers don't add up, the figures don't lie but the liars have to impose massive tax increases while cooking the books to make the numbers add up.

This is nothing more than government control of the nation....... tarp, G.M. ,Chrysler, banks, insurance, the list goes on and on. I wonder what the next crisis will be immigration count on it.

Your freedom will be the causality and you will serve the government that IS SUPPOSE TO SERVE YOU.

Welcome to 1984 now pay your taxes and serve the government you have no choice but the one that is "government approved"

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on August 19, 2009 at 4:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well said Warhog.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on August 19, 2009 at 4:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Again the question is asked. Where in the Consitution does it say you have a right to health insurance? Just show me and I will support you. But again it will go unanswered because it is not in the Consititution.
The specific, "enumerated" powers of Congress are spelled out in Article of I Section 8 the Constitution. There are twenty of them, and you can read the list for yourself here.

1. Borrow money
2. Regulate commerce among the states
3. Regulate naturalization
4. Regulate bankruptcies
5. Coin money
6. Fix weights and standards
7. Punish counterfeiters
8. Establish post offices
9. Establish post roads
10. Record patents
11. Protect copyrights
12. Create federal courts
13. Punish pirates
14. Declare war
15. Raise an army
16. Provide a navy
17. Call up the militia
18. Organize the militia
19. Makes laws for Washington, DC
20. Make rules for the Army and Navy
These are all the powers that the Congress has.

Because these powers are delegated from the people, they are the only powers Congress has. But our Founding Fathers went further -- trying hard to make enumerated powers so obvious that even a politician couldn't miss the point. They passed the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to shut the door to claims of additional power . . .

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

And it is the tradition of Congress, for each member, upon the start of their terms of office, to take an oath, promising to protect and uphold the Constitution. Do you remember that oath? Yet virtually every day that Congress is in session these same oath-takers become law-breakers -- passing laws and expending funds on items that are not Constitutionally permissible.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on August 19, 2009 at 5:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Over the years the government has used the Necessary & Proper Clause, the Commerce Clause, and Supreme Court penumbras to give the federal government powers the Constitution doesn't permit. IN FACT, MOST OF WHAT THEY DO THESE DAYS IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. If all three branches had been abiding by the enumerated powers, the federal government would be much, much, much, much, much, much smaller, and far more decentralized than it is today.

I ask that the federal government and it's members to get back to the CONSTITUTION. Show that you are willing to do the right thing... not just the politically expedient thing.

This could be your opportunity to have a long lasting and very visible legacy. Not just "how long you've been there," but actually leaving it a better place than when you arrived. I think that if our officals do not wake up to this there will be a change soon. It may be done at the voting both or done in the street but it is coming.

Posted by NOGOP (anonymous) on August 19, 2009 at 6:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

where have I heard that before? Same old B.S. Where is your options for healthcare. That's right I got mine to heck with you.

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on August 19, 2009 at 6:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Nogop do you have any experience in "socialized medicine"

I do just book an appointment for the V.A. they will see you in a few months.

This will implode the health care system an example for nogop. What happens when you sell ice cream on a hot day for a few bucks you make a profit and your business may grow. What happens when on that hot day you GIVE AWAY the ice cream every democrat for 100 miles around will demand his or her "share"

The business will fail because he cannot made a profit, too many customers for a limited supply he will have to ration the amount and be state sponsored because nobody can operate like the except the .gov

Say good bye to R&D if I cannot make a profit I will not invest into the business, expect long lines, poor service and the same three government approved flavors even nogop can understand this.

Nogop please read Thomas Paine's Common Sense the founding fathers knew what they were doing.

Socialism only works when you have enough of other peoples money to spend.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on August 19, 2009 at 7:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NoGOP,

Again show me where it is a right under our Constitution. The government works for us. We do not work for the government. Tell me who is going to pay for this socialized medicane? There will be rationing. Why because the law of supply and demand. You will strip the incentive to become a doctor or to create new drugs. Who will suffer? The young and the old.

I would bet dollars to donunts that the Obama administration will use Swine Flu as an emergancy to take over the healthcare industry. He will do it with an unelected Czar or he will use the 51 vote deal. This is a scary time. Government both parties are not doing the people's work. Socialized medicane will be a water shed moment.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on August 19, 2009 at 10:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thought some of you would like to see what Obama care looks like.

The First Lady helped create a notorious program that dumped poor patients on community hospitals, yet the national media ignore the story. Imagine if her husband were a Republican.

The University of Chicago Medical Center has received a good deal of justly opprobrious press over its policy of "redirecting" low-income patients to community hospitals while reserving its own beds for well-heeled patients requiring highly profitable procedures. Substantial coverage was given to a recent indictment of the program by the American College of Emergency Physicians. ACEP's president, Dr. Nick Jouriles, released a statement suggesting that the initiative comes "dangerously close to ‘patient dumping,' a practice made illegal by the Emergency Medical Labor and Treatment Act, and reflected an effort to ‘cherry pick' wealthy patients over poor."

Oddly absent from most of the unflattering press coverage of UCMC's patient-dumping scheme is any mention of the role our new First Lady played in devising the program. A laudable exception has been the Chicago Sun-Times, which reported last August that "Michelle Obama -- currently on unpaid leave from her $317,000-a-year job as a vice president of the prestigious hospital -- helped create the program."

Mrs. Obama first hatched the UCMC program as the "South Side Health Collaborative," which featured a gang of "counselors" whose job it was to "advise" low-income patients that they would be better off at other hospitals and clinics. The program was so successful in getting rid of unwanted patients that she expanded it, gave it a new name, and hired none other than David Axelrod to sell the program to the public. According to the Sun-Times, "Obama's wife and Valerie Jarrett, an Obama friend and adviser who chairs the medical center's board, backed the Axelrod firm's hiring." Axelrod helped the future First Lady formulate a public relations campaign in which the "Urban Health Initiative" was represented as a boon to the community actuated by the purest of altruistic motives.

Meanwhile, the program's parents, Michelle Obama and David Axelrod, have moved to Washington. As the First Lady and the President's closest advisor, they wield enormous power. Indeed, they may be the most powerful people in the Obama Administration, aside from the President himself. If these two characters were willing to betray their Chicago neighbors -- the South Side's most vulnerable citizens -- with a disgraceful program like the Urban Health Initiative, what sort of mischief will they devise for the hapless denizens of flyover country?

Come to think of it, isn't Obamacare being sold to us in pretty much the same way the Urban Health Initiative was sold to Chicago? http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/m...

Posted by MackTheKnife (anonymous) on August 20, 2009 at 7:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Warhog,

I watched a news program where a gentleman from the U.K by the name of David Hahn (or something like that) confirmed everything you said about health care in the U.K. He also mentioned that the U.K health care system is the 3rd LARGEST EMPLOYER IN THE WORLD! Only the Chinese Red Army and the Indian railroad company employs more people. Plus over half of these employees are administrative in nature. Not good!

Posted by leftys2221 (anonymous) on August 20, 2009 at 8:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

People find this websites that support their opinion and treat them like it is the 100% truth.

Posted by leftys2221 (anonymous) on August 20, 2009 at 8:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Only a republican would say that health care is not a right. That is a direct shot at poor people who can not afford it. Once again here is the attitude of "well I have it so if you do not you are just lazy and don't work hard enough."

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on August 20, 2009 at 10:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

So leftys2221 you believe it is a right. Yet it is not. So you say it is an attack against poor people. It is not. Where do you get the right to take other people's money and give it to who you think deserve it. Money is property and if I remember right you and I under the rule of law are able to keep our property. Thus this idea that we must have the government take what is not theirs and give it to who they feel should have it is wrong. Entitlements take away the incentive to work. It is not about being lazy. It is about give a man a fish he eats for a day teach him to fish and he eats for a lifetime.

Posted by Truth (anonymous) on August 20, 2009 at 10:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This is from the Wall Street Journal. I have provided the link at the end of the story.

While we clearly need health-care reform, the last thing our country needs is a massive new health-care entitlement that will create hundreds of billions of dollars of new unfunded deficits and move us much closer to a government takeover of our health-care system. Instead, we should be trying to achieve reforms by moving in the opposite direction—toward less government control and more individual empowerment. Here are eight reforms that would greatly lower the cost of health care for everyone:

• Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs). The combination of high-deductible health insurance and HSAs is one solution that could solve many of our health-care problems. For example, Whole Foods Market pays 100% of the premiums for all our team members who work 30 hours or more per week (about 89% of all team members) for our high-deductible health-insurance plan. We also provide up to $1,800 per year in additional health-care dollars through deposits into employees' Personal Wellness Accounts to spend as they choose on their own health and wellness.

Money not spent in one year rolls over to the next and grows over time. Our team members therefore spend their own health-care dollars until the annual deductible is covered (about $2,500) and the insurance plan kicks in. This creates incentives to spend the first $2,500 more carefully. Our plan's costs are much lower than typical health insurance, while providing a very high degree of worker satisfaction.

• Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair.

• Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. We should all have the legal right to purchase health insurance from any insurance company in any state and we should be able use that insurance wherever we live. Health insurance should be portable.

• Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying.

• Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care.

Posted by Truth (anonymous) on August 20, 2009 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

(2nd part)

• Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care.

• Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost. How many people know the total cost of their last doctor's visit and how that total breaks down? What other goods or services do we buy without knowing how much they will cost us?

• Enact Medicare reform. We need to face up to the actuarial fact that Medicare is heading towards bankruptcy and enact reforms that create greater patient empowerment, choice and responsibility.

• Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren't covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on August 20, 2009 at 10:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Here is something for leftys2221 and the rest that think healthcare is a right from the same news story.

Many promoters of health-care reform believe that people have an intrinsic ethical right to health care—to equal access to doctors, medicines and hospitals. While all of us empathize with those who are sick, how can we say that all people have more of an intrinsic right to health care than they have to food or shelter?

Health care is a service that we all need, but just like food and shelter it is best provided through voluntary and mutually beneficial market exchanges. A careful reading of both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution will not reveal any intrinsic right to health care, food or shelter. That's because there isn't any. This "right" has never existed in America

Even in countries like Canada and the U.K., there is no intrinsic right to health care. Rather, citizens in these countries are told by government bureaucrats what health-care treatments they are eligible to receive and when they can receive them. All countries with socialized medicine ration health care by forcing their citizens to wait in lines to receive scarce treatments.

Although Canada has a population smaller than California, 830,000 Canadians are currently waiting to be admitted to a hospital or to get treatment, according to a report last month in Investor's Business Daily. In England, the waiting list is 1.8 million.

Health-care reform is very important. Whatever reforms are enacted it is essential that they be financially responsible, and that we have the freedom to choose doctors and the health-care services that best suit our own unique set of lifestyle choices. We are all responsible for our own lives and our own health. We should take that responsibility very seriously and use our freedom to make wise lifestyle choices that will protect our health. Doing so will enrich our lives and will help create a vibrant and sustainable American society.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...

Posted by realchange (anonymous) on August 20, 2009 at 11:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey Lefty,
Our chosen one is rushing this health care reform or health insurance reform, or whatever he is calling it today because he wants his legacy, he doesn't want the american people a chance to actually read the bill and get smart and realize how bad this is.

He can prove himself by fixing Medicare and social security first, maybe then we'll have a little confidence in him. He is now depending on the worship he is receiving from people like you. But you know what? More and More Ex Worshipers are seeing the light and are against this health care plan. You keep saying we need to help the poor, but in case you didn't know it, they already get free care and unfortunately, so do the illegals.