Tax-financed health care

redcliffsw · June 26, 2009, 07:00:33 AM

Obama's supporters dislike the socialism sobriquet, but socialized medicine by stealth is what we'll end up with. Moreover, and for the sake of semantic veracity, let us, at the very least, name the beast rising out of this sea of statism: the "public option" is really "tax-financed health care."

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=102186

Catwoman · June 26, 2009, 07:07:01 AM

Ye gods...Semantic veracity? There are some $25,000.00 words for ya! What a way to wake up on an early Friday morning...! lol And, by the way...A good post. O keeps stating that, if you already have health insurance, you won't be forced to change. Uh, that's great...Until all of the companies get rid of their existing plans, in favor of turning their employees over to the State plan.

redcliffsw · June 26, 2009, 07:43:28 AM

It would be a fiasco for sure.

One wonders how the country can ever survive with the commitments
and entitlements already in place.

Folks ought to be against socialism and be not afraid to take a stand.
Afterall, our country was founded on principles against socialism.

larryJ · June 26, 2009, 09:10:29 AM

Government run health insurance can work if it is properly handled. Doctors and Hospitals today have the option of accepting which health insurance plans they want. If the government offers a low cost health insurance plan, many people currently without insurance could sign up to get coverage, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they can go just anywhere to get treated. If O is looking at it as threatening the existence of private health insurers then that is the wrong way to go. It should be looked at as a way to get people the help they need rather than a competition. There will be some who will drop their coverage in favor of cheaper government insurance, but they might not get the same quality care they had before. I know I wouldn't sacrifice my health and have to give up my primary care doctor for someone who maybe isn't as good. I know I wouldn't want to drive 25 miles to a hospital that accepts government insurance when I can just go 1 mile with my current insurance. Some companies might/would drop their insurance plans in favor of the cheaper insurance, but if the government said that the government plan was for those who do not have the benefit of insurance from the company they work for, and telling those companies who do offer health insurance that they don't have the option to offer the cheaper insurance, then it might work. In other words, if you work for a company or someone who doesn't offer insurance, you qualify for government insurance. If you do work for a company does offer it, you don't qualify for it. Look at it like a social program such as welfare. If you are under a certain income lever, you qualify for welfare. If you make more, you don't. But the store you shop at is still going to take your money no matter where you got it from.

Cheeesh and I haven't even had my second cup yet.

Larryj

Catwoman · June 26, 2009, 09:33:58 AM

If that's what only one cup does for you, then I'm waiting eagerly to see what the second cup brings! lol

jerry wagner · June 26, 2009, 10:24:38 AM

I am sorry to jump in here but Doctors should not have the option to either accept Medicaid/Medicare/etc. as the government provides the license for them to practice. It represents an unfair disadvantage to those using those options, some of which have no alternative. Why should someone with Medicare, age 72 for example, living on a fixed income not be able to utilize a specialist because they do not accept Medicare? That is unethical and should be corrected. You don't want to accept Medicare/Medicaid/etc. don't petition the state for a license to practice.....

redcliffsw · June 26, 2009, 10:37:18 AM

That's not unethical. We ought to be strivng to keep a free country.

Gov't programs are limiting freedoms.

The Fed's should not be paying for anything. This country was established
so that folks could be free to take care of themselves for their own needs and
to provide for their own wants.

larryJ · June 26, 2009, 10:59:04 AM

I usually arise early (between 6 and 7) and have two cups of coffee whilst cruising the forum. Once I have read it and commented where I wanted to comment, I have breakfast. By this time it is between 9 and 10 AM. Unlike others, coffee has no effect on me as far as keeping me awake. If there is nothing pressing, I take a nap. I am only eloquent, read full of it, during those first two hours. After that it is downhill. My wife has been off work for a while due to physical disability so we get to spend a lot of time together which, I guess, is good in some ways. She sleeps in and when she wakes I bring her a cup of coffee. She remains in the bedroom and while waking up begins to organize her day and make any phone calls needed. She then goes to the kitchen for her second cup of coffee and informs me of the schedule for the day. If there is nothing pressing, i.e., appointments, etc., then we both take a nap. Lazy? Sure, but we have worked all our lives, raised our children, enjoy our grandchildren, and are not suffering from empty nest syndrome. However, my wife has stated vigorously in the past she will not move away from our grandchildren so we live in our same house of 35 years and enjoy the peace and quiet. Not lazy. Communication? There is less because we know each other's habits and can almost read each others mind. So there is no need for unnecessary communication. And, besides, all communication now has shifted towards reminding each other of something that the other forgot. A great deal of our time is spent in tracking down lost glasses or keys which don't seem to get put in a place where they are supposed to be. Love? If you have been able to live with the same person for 35 years and survive, then you have love. So if you love each other and are comfortable and happy and have the opportunity to enjoy a good nap once or twice a day, enjoy your children and grandchildren, what else is there? Excitement? If I wake up in the morning and read the obituarys and I am not in them, I am excited. We do take weekend trips up the coast.

I hope I didn't make you wait too long!!!!!

Larryj

Catwoman · June 26, 2009, 11:09:00 AM

Wow...larry, you're great! How fun it is to get to know another of the Forum Greats!

larryJ · June 26, 2009, 11:20:13 AM

Thanks, Cat. Great? nah, just getting along with life. While typing my last lengthy reponse, however, I missed the posts about Medicare and Doctors. I didn't read all of this article and it is too big to paste here, but check it out.

www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/business/retirementspecial/02health.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

I did read and I am not sure if it was in the above site, but it is more expensive for a Doctor to process a medicare patient than other patients, something like over $14 for the medicare patient and a little over $11 for the others. I guess this would be a reason for Doctors to not accept Medicare patients.

Larryj