Posted by eileen113 on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 8:34 AM:
With the August recess coming up, it looks as though there will be no bills coming out yet. Which I feel is good. I am asking for your opinions on this subject.
Personally, I feel anything that goes through must address pre-existing conditions, beyond that, personally, I like the co-op plan coming out of the Senate. My reasoning is that the government would not be in direct competition with companies it regulates.
If you are in favor of a government option, I would like to know your reasoning and how it would be payed for.
Maybe this can give our elected officials some thoughts before they go back to Washington and vote.
Replies (13)
I have read, and re-read dozens of different health care reform plans.
The Republicans' and the Democrats' plans are really not that different.
The reduction in Medicare benefits is upsetting because not only are so many senior citizens dependent on the program, many of us have a vested interest in Medicare.
The only solution that I see as viable is the one that will not cost taxpayers a dime, and will be sucessful. This is also the option that neither of our political parties will consider and that is the free market.
Here are some suggestions from various websites and publications that sound promising...
Allow importation of drugs from foreign countries.
Make more scripts available as OTC drugs.
Abolish the FDA.
Allow competing buisnesses or non-profits to provide medical certification.
Tort reform.
Allow independent nursing practices.
Shorten patent terms on drugs and medical devices.
Deregulate health insurance.
Promote healthy nutrition at an early age. Remove junk food and soda machines from our schools.
-- Posted by Lumpy on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 10:27 AM
What I'd like to see is a little more open honesty from our politicians as they tout their health plans ... i.e., claiming 45 million uninsured, but not mentioning that most of that number includes people on Medicaid and children on SCHIPS.
And how about some honesty about whether or not every single one of our politicians has read AND understood the 1,000-page bill.
Okay ... simple opinion ... Let things stand as they are ... Medicare, Medicaid, those with insurance ... and ONLY concentrate on what could be done to give some sort of health coverage to those who are actually uninsured and who can honestly NOT pay for insurance.
Although ... the latter might be surprised and dismayed if the government got involved in telling them what they could do without in order to pay for insurance ... and if the government (the taxpayers) will be paying for their health care, then it surely should have the right to expect accountability from the recipients.
Remember though: People on Medicare (who have paid into the program for decades) usually (or should if possible) pay for Part A plus supplements (as well as co-pays & 'The Gap' for prescriptions)... which can cost upward of $350-$400. None of those costs are based upon income!
-- Posted by gurusmom on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 2:41 PM
Forgot to ask: Don't know where I got this idea, but isn't there something somewhere sort of saying our government cannot be in direct competition with the private sector?
-- Posted by gurusmom on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 2:43 PM
Don't recall the episode name from the original star trek series. But the story line was that Capt. Kirk and crew was visiting a planet that once you reached a certain age it was off to the pushing up daisy's dept.
In discussion of the healthcare the other day with a friend this was brought up that since we (not I) as a society don't have much respect for the unborn how can we maintain a respect for the aging population that places a tremendous financial burden on us. Been to a nursing home lately? I for one want to respect life whether in the womb or close to the tomb, but if we continue to make reasons for the prior to be a burden when adoption is an option. Don't be surprised when we see our own version of star trek coming to your home or one near by.
Now if you are like me in my late 30's you may think you have many years ahead of you. But you may have an unfortunate accident or stroke that leaves you disabled. Do you think the "state" will wait until you reach a certain age? I would think that once the elderly are turned into daisy's then the ones in the middle will get the squeeze. If I recall my history correctly wasn't there a country in Europe that at one time thought of themselves a ultimate race and needed to eliminate the undesirables from society.
-- Posted by gman on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 7:45 AM
I like the Logan's Run version of population control. It took all the guess work out of it, and they throw you a helluva party.
-- Posted by Lumpy on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 8:36 AM
Our country is and has been run by an evil elite who now are unleashing the first phases of a totalitarian eugenicist agenda.
To get a taste of the type of mad scientist thinking and proposed laws that we are soon to have forced on us, read this excellent article about Obama's Csar of science and technology. This article is not a "conspiracy theory." It is John Holdren's own words from the book he co-wrote. http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-science-czars-plan-to-sterilize-population-thr...
-- Posted by Thought Criminal on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 8:39 AM
Me'Lange
It is a interesting catch 22. Kinda like dejavu if you think about it. The ones that scream pro-choice and they have the right have inabled society to come to a point that this is even accepted and discussed as a possibility of ones demise as a choice by someone other then themselves.
Gives pro-choice a whole new meaning.
My only question would be is the procedure going to be humane or will they be sucked out of this world....if you catch the meaning.
-- Posted by gman on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 9:53 AM
Lumpy, Carousel, carousel....
How long would it take if UHC becomes law before everyone has to give DNA and mandatory donor information?
Convicted crimanals have to give DNA upon release, Mo. is also now taking DNA from those charged but, not convicted. Is it in the realm of possibility that DNA will be taken as part of the treatment at a gov. hospital? Or even at birth at a gov. hospital?
-- Posted by Airborne 95B on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 2:46 PM
lumpy, the Logan's Run thing has come to my mind several times throughout all this talk ... Wasn't it something like at age 35 a person was determined past their usefulness? ~laughing~
gman ... Very deep thoughts. Thanks.
Myself ... I don't see abortion as much of anything but ... well, the killing of a human being which almost always could have been avoided by the simple measure of birth control. Same as I'd view depriving an old person of life because he/she is no longer 'useful' or is a 'burden' on family and/or society, by simply having lived too long. And we haven't even touched on the mentally handicapped/disabled!
-- Posted by gurusmom on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 4:41 PM
Yes!!! Logan's Run! ZAP!
-- Posted by Grandpa_Sassy on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 6:25 PM
Airborne,
Your post has a conspiracy theory tinge to it me thinks ;)
-- Posted by Lumpy on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 7:28 PM
It's not an issue of Healthcare Reform, but, it's an issue of Health Insurance Reform.
-- Posted by vietnamvet on Sun, Aug 2, 2009, at 12:33 PM
Just keeping the X-files in mind...
-- Posted by Airborne 95B on Sun, Aug 2, 2009, at 2:07 PM
Menu
With the August recess coming up, it looks as though there will be no bills coming out yet. Which I feel is good. I am asking for your opinions on this subject.
Personally, I feel anything that goes through must address pre-existing conditions, beyond that, personally, I like the co-op plan coming out of the Senate. My reasoning is that the government would not be in direct competition with companies it regulates.
If you are in favor of a government option, I would like to know your reasoning and how it would be payed for.
Maybe this can give our elected officials some thoughts before they go back to Washington and vote.
Replies (13)