My point was not one of arrogance, but one that neither you nor anyone else who does not live in this country has to pay for this Messiah's programs....we, the working people and small business owners of the US are the ones who foot the bill. I love the stats on mortality rates and obesity rates in the US because they are used to distort the facts in a very subtle way. If you were to look beneath the stats you would find that many of those people who are obese and who die young are people who are on public assistance. Ironically the people most of these programs were meant to help are the ones who have suffered the most. None of the arguments for this health care address one very simple core point. That is the point of accountability. Obama and his cronies believe that more government is going solve all problems. My beliefs are not the opposite, but one that somewhere along the line people have to accept responsibility for their own actions. I have a small business and my actions not only affect my family but seven other families That is a tough responsibility to bear, but one that I have to tackle. When I screw up there is no one there to bail me out. When a pay cut has to be done, it starts with me. The US government doesn't function like that. Their attitude is one that there is always more money to be had from the taxpayers. That attitude needs to be corrected.
This is where I was going when I posted the ABC News Investigation on how Government allows waste and corruption (not who's arrogant, or Canada vs USA). The question is: Who (Private vs Government) is best suited to administrate – manage – run healthcare most efficiently and be accountable? From the news investigation in which AT MINIMUM: $60 billion is stolen from tax payers through Medicare scams is outrageous! The report also mentions that simple checks and balances, if implemented, would drastically cut down on these abuses. However, not enough is being done – the Government simply does not have the same incentives to be accountable and efficient as private industry.
LOL :flash::beer4::mexicoflag: Can't we all just get along, that does it, I'm going to Cabos this year:icon_lol:
Call your congressman, get threatened with arrest Po by Capitol Confidential Yesterday, I decided to call Rep. John Garamendi’s (CA-10) office in Washington, D.C. He’s my representative and I wanted to voice my opposition to the Senate Health Care Bill. I spoke with a female staffer and politely told her that, while I support health care reform, I oppose the Senate Bill because it wasn’t true “reform.” She said the Congressman thinks it’s a good bill and that he campaigned on health care reform. I told her I knew that. I also mentioned that I voted for him. When I tried to give her specific reasons why the Senate Bill would harm our system rather than reform it, she refused to listen. She said she was very busy and hung up on me. Being the persistent person that I am, I kept calling back. Each time I tried to finish my point, she hung up. I called one more time. This time she said, “If you call one more time, we will notify Capital Police.” I asked why my conduct warranted involving federal law enforcement agents. She said I was “harassing” her. I tried to explain that trying to convince a representative to change his or her vote didn’t constitute “harassment.” Before I could fully explain, she hung up again. I called back. This time, I asked to speak to her supervisor in order to report her repeated hanging up as well as the threat she made. I was placed on hold. Thinking I was holding for her supervisor, I was shocked when a Federal Agent with the Capital Police picked-up the telephone. At first, the Agent was curt with me. He claimed I was harassing Mr. Garamendi’s staff by continually calling after being told to stop calling. I asked him when it became a federal crime to lobby a congressman. He said that it wasn’t but it was a crime to “harass” congressional members and staff pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 223. I told him I was an attorney (which I am) and that I would research the statute he had cited. After researching 47 U.S.C. 223, I called Mr. Garamendi’s office again and asked to be transferred back to the Capital Police Agent. The Agent picked up the phone and I explained to him that the statute he cited was not controlling since it only prohibits people from calling with the specific intent to harass. I further explained that I was simply trying to voice my concerns with the intent of getting Mr. Garamendi to change his mind, not to harass his staff. The Agent eventually agreed with my position and said he would call Mr. Garamendi’s office and instruct his staff that I was within my rights to call my congressman and voice my concerns. After I hung up, I realized that this story should be told. Besides being an attorney, I’ve also had the privilege of serving this great country in the United States Marine Corps. Having seen the ugly legislative process the Senate Bill had been through, I saw this as not just another tactic to pass the Senate Bill at all costs, but also as an affront to our liberties. While I’m fortunate enough to be able to legally challenge what happened today, others aren’t. The sad part is the democrats know this. They know that Americans unfamiliar with federal jurisprudence can easily be silenced when threats to involve federal agents are made. They know that most Americans don’t want trouble and they’ll go away rather than face the possibility of having to explain themselves to federal agents. That’s why I found this tactic appalling, as a Marine, as an attorney and as a proud American. During my final contact with Mr. Garamendi’s staff, it was confirmed to me that he would vote for the Senate Bill no matter what. I was told that I was wasting my time by calling. Mr. Garamendi is a junior member of the House of Representatives. He was just elected via a special election last November. He has made it clear that he is willing to forsake his constituents in order to please the Speaker of the House. Speaker Pelosi has said that she will stop at nothing to get the Senate Bill passed. She publicly stated that she would “pole vault over a wall” if barriers stood in her way. While that may be an amusing spectacle, it is indicative of what happened to me today. Apparently, threatening Americans with federal crimes to silence them is the latest tool in Speaker Pelosi’s dirty bag of tricks. In the coming days, I’m sure more stories will develop illustrating the “win at all costs” tactics being employed by democrats. It’s these tactics that have appalled a majority of Americans to the point that the Senate Bill has overwhelmingly been rejected by the American people. When we try to explain that to Speaker Pelosi’s Caucus, we are threatened with criminal sanctions. We are told to shut up or face federal agents. Such treatment may be acceptable in the former Soviet Union, but it’s repulsive in the country I love and served. Is this hope and change?
Having had to work with government employees I can totally understand what happened Dale. It is so ironic to me that the same people who deplored these tactics when Bush-Cheney did them, now think there is nothing wrong with doing the same things. The American public be damned is their attitude. Dale, I'll bet you are wondering, as I am what the hell we were really fighting for when we were in the military. The Clowns of DC are in the process of destroying it all and I have to wonder a simple WHY??? Is the party so important that the destruction of a nation takes precedence? Apparently it is!
What really gets me.. (in addition to the fact that I HATE POLITICS! and people who can't see past their own rhetoric!) .. is that the US government and citizens ALREADY pay for the health care cost of the uninsured..... do you really think that the unpaid Emergency Room bills racked up by uninsured people just magically go away? They get passed on to the paying customers and subsidized by the government. I'm not saying this new bill is any good, as I (like nearly everyone talking about it and the lawmakers) haven't read it, but it's not like we're not paying either way. The "I don't want to pay for their health care" crowd needs to realize that YOU ALREADY PAY via inflated medical costs and premiums. The "I'm healthy and don't want to pay for insurance" crowd needs to wakeup and realize that you're just as likely as the next guy to get hit by a car. The "I have a small business and can't afford insurance" crowd... yeah you're gonna get screwed at first, but there are supposed to be subsidies to soften the blow and I'm sure there will be plenty of loopholes to keep you from ponying up the cash. The "I want my free health care" crowd.... ain't nothing free... but if you're already sucking the system dry at least now there will be more people putting money into it so it doesn't run the deficit up every time you visit the ER with a headache. Basically, it's going to happen.... we will not know for years and years if its actually better or worse than the system in place today ( I expect a mixed result)... but if nothing else it should (eventually) slow the increasing cost of health care since more and more people will have some sort of coverage. Also LOL at the states who are suing the Fed saying the bill is "unconstitutional".... I'm going to write that on my next tax return.. that its "unconstitutional" to tax me since I don't agree with how the money is being spent.. and I'll cite all of the Attorneys General's who are holding that position right now in their lawsuits. I guess Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are also "unconstitutional".... :aktion061:
I'm going to step into the fray here and ask a couple of questions that I really would like an honest answer to. I'm obviously from Canada and have been following this topic with interest because I work in a health care facility. 1. Why does everyone that argues against Government health care believe that the 35 million people without coverage are jobless and not contributing to society? From what I've read the majority of those people work in jobs that either they can't afford health insurance and/or their work doesn't offer any insurance. 2. Why is government heath care billed as the first step towards communism? It seems to get lumped in by fear mongers that claim the government wants to control your lives. Canada and the UK are both democratic governments with health care. While ours is not perfect it works and I need not have to worry about a car accident making me homeless. 3. Why would you deny a basic human need for health to your fellow man? There are shelters for people without homes. Food banks for those that can't afford food. Welfare for people who out of work. Why not health care for those that can't afford to go to the hospital? 4. Lastly, can you really rationalize insurance companies who drop clients or deny service for pre-existing conditions? Like it's their fault for what's in their genes. The fact of the matter is that the worse off your financial position is the worse your state of health usually is. In other words. The people that can't afford health care need it the most. Long term effects actually show that it can reduce health care costs later in life. A little thing like regular checkups can flag problems early so that they can be fixed instead of catching them when it's too late and too costly.
OK.. I’ll try and answer your questions rationally. But first, in order to understand my answers, you must put aside the thought that I am an uncaring brute that rather see people die in the streets than pay for their health care. Yes I am prone to droping into the rhetoric now and then, but when a group of people go about this bill as they have and you feel like you are talking to a brick wall because they are going to do what they want no matter the long term outcome because they can… well I said I’d try and stay rational… OK.. Question 1.. Never heard that one. We’ve been told its children, the working poor, those without jobs or have jobs that offer no benefits. Then there are those that choose to have no insurance, those in their early 20’s for example that haven’t been sick yet so don’t see the need for spending their limited resources in that direction. You know, people that shamefully want to spend their paycheck they way they want to. See this one is where we watch what is going on at home… Does you government own major portions of banks, car companies? China does, Russia did before the communist fell, and the US Government does. Oh, they say it’s only temporary but there is a lot of “temporary” things still happening in our Government today. Look at the American Government over time. It wasn’t till recently they we finally dismantled the welfare state that existed for years. We have generations of a family on welfare. Grandma, Mom, daughter.. all popping babies and getting larger checks for it. Why work when someone will give you a check for free. Took over 50 years to come back to a more reasonable welfare assistance package. But until then it was the biggest line item on the budget. So when someone comes along and say we are going to shift 1/6th, 1/6th of the current economy under government control, one tends to stand up and take notice. Now this is where you’re believing the rhetoric of the other side. Contrary to popular believe there are several Government programs already in place to help. They are several programs to help children that are being paid for but not used by these same children that we need this new health care plan for. Again.. I, and the vast, overwhelming majority of people on my side, OK there are always a few idiots on any side, do not believe that people should die in the streets. Yes, our health care system has problems. No one denies that. But this bill that has been forged with deals in back rooms is not the answer. Oh sure, they took four throwaway non consequential proposals by the Republications and shouted that they had worked towards inclusions. But we’re not that stupid. We remember the days a year ago they Nancy stood on the Capital steps and said join us on our bill or we’ll pass it anyway without you. Nice start for working across the isle. Again, you’re listening to people that are telling you what I think, not to me telling you what I think. This is one item I totally agree with. It should be part of any bill that passes. Now, for the questions you didn’t ask… Nancy said this bill was all along about affordable heath care. Where are the savings in insurance policies? Where are any limits on costs? There are none. They answer, tax the rich to subsidies the cost for those that can’t afford it. So as the costs continue to go up, the taxes will continue to go up and be added to those making less and less. See any problem with that? I do since it’s my paycheck they will eventually come after. Oh.. and see any problem with taxing people now for benefits that may or may not come to pass in 2 to 3 years? I say may or may not because the next congress, or even this congress, can amend the law at anytime and change the future. And the future is where all the savings occur.. they promise.. for them and all congresses that follow. No one will ever change their minds about what to do or how to pay for it. And once the first person is on the new plan it will be another 50 years before any major change might be able to take place to control its growth. Look at our Social Security. Great idea when it started and it grew and grew until we couldn’t tax enough to cover the cost. So it’s headed for bankruptcy by 2050 but they are still collecting taxes from me for it now. So yeah, we are not a trusting lot when it comes to what our government says. I guess unlike yours, they have a proven track record to say one thing and do another. So we keep an eye on them. I hope this has stayed somewhat rational in your eyes and helps explain where we are coming from. I don’t believe there is nothing wrong with our health care system. There is and it should be fixed. However, this country was based upon free markets and free enterprise and I think that is where it should be addressed, not as a massive government program that has us all sucking the tit of Washington from birth till grave. And don’t blame the recession on free enterprise. Go back, read the headlines and really read where the government told the banks to lend money to people that couldn’t afford it or risk massive government intrusion. Which when the shit hit the fan the government forgot all about, blamed the greedy banks and gave them massive government intrusion anyway. But that’s another story that has already been addressed on here. Jamie
I don't think people assume that they are not working... but the side against the bill is arguing that "its not fair that "they" get "free" (subsidized) health care while "we" pay" its the similar argument against welfare... the "why should I pay?" argument and that it encourages people to not work and freeload off of the government. Politics... pure and simple.. anything side A proposes is always wrong, immoral, devil worship to side B and visaversa.. (re: my statement about HATING POLITICS!) The argument is its "NOT a right" if "I have to pay for it" (ref: your first question) Every man for himself thinking... Thats the downside to a free market system, companies can and do practice policies that protect their interests at the expense of clients. It may not be "fair" to the person in need, but at the same time the company can argue its not "fair" that they take on such a (potentially costly) risk. For the record I have mixed feelings on it... I don't think this is the best time.. (with two costly ongoing wars, and a ridiculously high debt) and I don't like the fact that it is being "rammed" through... on the other hand.. in todays world most measures are "rammed" by both sides when they have their moment in power. I'd like to see a bill desolving political parties and requiring everyone to register as "independent" so there will at least be more than 2 schools of thought running the US. But thats about as likley as FoxNews being "fair and balanced" :icon_wink:
Jamie, thanks for the rational and calm response. I didn't expect you to freak out but I just want to say that. So far almost all of the news I've seen on this subject has had people screaming out of control and honestly the amount of hysteria is something that I still can't understand. I can completely understand the resistance to a change that is being forced on you. But there have been cases where forced change ended up being a good thing. I think we all would agree that the end of slavery, integration, giving women equal rights are all changes that were forced but now we see it as something that needed to be done. In Canada there was HUGE uproar from the right over gay marriage but the would has not come to end and it's now an non-issue. The US doesn't hold the market on politicians who lie. I think that's something we all have in common *L*. One court in Canada actually told angry taxpayers that they should expect politicians to lie and could not take them to court for it. *L* I don't like government in my personal business but I'm glad we have health care here in Canada and hope you get a system as good as ours or better. Don't believe the BS when they talk about the Canadian system being a failure. I have a Dr whom I really don't need to see much. I've been into an emergency room 3 or 4 times in the last 4 years and really only waited a long time once. 5 hours in a tiny town hospital that only had one Dr working at the time. Every other time I've been in and out in an hour or less. I once had to go see a specialist and was in to see them a week later. Does our system have issues yeah. A lot of our Drs end up going to the US for more money (the brain drain). Would I rather have a fee for service system.. no way. Again... thanks for your response. We may not ever agree on this but we can at least calmly debate.
