Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

  • Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

Here comes socialized healthcare.

im guessing the new reform will end up something like.. some stupid jackazz fix that will not help anybody.but they will try to look like they are doing something about the problem.
 
Last edited:
Let me see if I can predict what will come of this.

Poor people will be able to schedule doctor visits with doctors other than government health clinics. People with jobs will have their health care eventually degraded to a much lower level. The poor will figure out how to scam the system for prescription meds, they can peddle. The system will go into debt so bad, they'll have to make drastic cutbacks, and "manage health care costs". Prescription drug companies will stop investing. And, no one will be happy, other than the unemployed severely ill.
 
Is it healthcare for the people or union bailouts?

May 13, 2009
Big Labor's Investment in Obama Pays Off
By Michelle Malkin

"We spent a fortune to elect Barack Obama -- $60.7 million to be exact -- and we're proud of it," boasted Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, to the Las Vegas Sun this week. The behemoth labor organization's leadership is getting its money's worth. Whether rank-and-file workers and ordinary taxpayers are profiting from this ultimate campaign pay-for-play scheme is another matter entirely.

The two-million-member union, which represents both government and private service employees, proudly claimed that its workers "knocked on 1.87 million doors, made 4.4 million phone calls and sent more than 2.5 million pieces of mail in support of Obama." It dispatched SEIU leaders to seven states in the final weekend before the election to get out the vote for Obama and other Democrats.

Through a series of local chapter takeovers and bully campaigns to destroy the reputation of executives who refuse to submit to their will, Stern and his scandal-plagued lieutenants have consolidated low-skill service workers to create a 21st century labor empire. The ubiquitous Stern now enjoys a prominent seat at the table of every major policy discussion at the White House, including economic recovery and health care radicalization.

Obama champions the SEIU's top legislative priorities: expansive government health care (paid for with regressive sin taxes) and the "Employee Free Choice Act" to do away with private-ballot union elections in the workplace. He has SEIU-blessed bureaucrats installed in every corner of his administration to carry out the agenda.

The SEIU scored not one but two Cabinet appointees: Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis. The SEIU pitched in with maximum donations to Solis' first congressional campaign and lent her nearly 300 canvassers and ground troops. "I wouldn't be here, were it not for my friends in the labor movement," she gushed. Indeed, over four terms in Congress, Solis has pocketed more than $900,000 in union campaign contributions.

Former SEIU chief lobbyist Patrick Gaspard served as the Obama campaign's national political director and transition deputy director of personnel. During the 2004 election cycle, he led the George Soros-funded group America Coming Together (ACT) as national field director. SEIU poured $23 million of workers' dues money into ACT in its failed attempt to put Democratic Sen. John Kerry in the White House. Under Gaspard's tenure at ACT, the get-out-the-vote group employed convicted felons as canvassers and committed campaign finance violations that led to a $775,000 fine by the Federal Election Commission. Gaspard was appointed White House political director shortly after Election Day 2008.

SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger was appointed to the president's Economic Recovery Advisory Board to provide advice on "boosting the sagging U.S. economy" (translation: imposing new employment regulations on companies and expanding union membership rolls).

Within two weeks of moving into the White House, Obama signed a series of executive orders championed by union bosses. The new rules authorized sweeping powers for the labor secretary that essentially blackball nonunion contractors targeted by labor organizers and blacklist nonunion employees in the private sector from working on taxpayer-funded projects. Such regulatory favoritism limits freedom in the workplace and raises the cost of doing business.

Another measure immediately adopted by Obama requires that when a government service contract runs out and there's a new contract to perform the same services at the same location, the new contractor must retain the old workers. Mickey Kaus of the left-leaning Slate magazine dubbed the move the "Labor Payoff of the Day."

The payoffs keep coming. Last week Obama slashed the Labor Department's funding to investigate union corruption -- a welcome move for Stern, who has seen three of his handpicked deputies resign in 2008-2009 over financial scandals involving cronyism, nepotism and embezzlement.

California officials also reported last week that the Obama White House gave the SEIU an unprecedented role in negotiations over federal stimulus funds. According to the Los Angeles Times, the union lobbied the feds to withhold nearly $7 billion in stimulus money from California unless it revoked a wage cut for unionized health care workers -- which had already been approved by Democratic lawmakers as part of a budget deal forged in February. Top SEIU officials participated in a conference call last month on the issue; the Obama White House backs the union demands.

SEIU's enforcers have set aside $10 million to un-elect any of its political beneficiaries who abandon their pledges to do the union's legislative bidding. The campaign money was raised by slapping an extra $6-per-member fee on top of regular dues payments -- and funneled straight to the union's political action committee. Meanwhile, after spending a fortune to put Obama in office, the union laid off a third of its D.C. field staff (in violation of its own employment protections, according to the
workers) due to . budget troubles.

The laid-off workers are collateral damage in Big Labor's pursuit of power. The only jobs guaranteed by SEIU's merger with Hope and Change, Inc. belong to the brass.

Copyright 2009, Creators Syndicate Inc.
 
Let me see if I can predict what will come of this.

Poor people will be able to schedule doctor visits with doctors other than government health clinics. People with jobs will have their health care eventually degraded to a much lower level. The poor will figure out how to scam the system for prescription meds, they can peddle. The system will go into debt so bad, they'll have to make drastic cutbacks, and "manage health care costs". Prescription drug companies will stop investing. And, no one will be happy, other than the unemployed severely ill.


Can't wait. Those of us that work will get to pay for the people that don't work to have health care. Then when those of us that work go in to see a doctor, we get to wait behind those that don't work.. O wait, that's how it already is. I can't wait for Montana to secede. :D
 
Can't wait. Those of us that work will get to pay for the people that don't work to have health care. Then when those of us that work go in to see a doctor, we get to wait behind those that don't work.. O wait, that's how it already is.

Yah, nothing is really going to change, except for the fact that those that don't have health insurance now will be able to have doctors visits instead of emergency care visits...

We pay for the uninsured already...
 
Yah, nothing is really going to change, except for the fact that those that don't have health insurance now will be able to have doctors visits instead of emergency care visits...

We pay for the uninsured already...

So how DO we pay for the uninsured? I'm not arguing, I am wanting to know. I know that we do, just don't understand how.
 
So how DO we pay for the uninsured? I'm not arguing, I am wanting to know. I know that we do, just don't understand how.

They go to the emergency room, they get service and can not be refused. Then they don't pay for the service. Those that do pay, see an increase in prices to cover these costs. A hospital is business. They do it to make money.

So I guess a better statement would be we indirectly pay.

That is my thoughts on it anyways. Anyone think any different?
 
They go to the emergency room, they get service and can not be refused. Then they don't pay for the service. Those that do pay, see an increase in prices to cover these costs. A hospital is business. They do it to make money.

So I guess a better statement would be we indirectly pay.

That is my thoughts on it anyways. Anyone think any different?

So with this said, do you think we(the insured) will see a drop in our monthly insurance premiums since our tax dollars will be used to insure the uninsured?
 
So with this said, do you think we(the insured) will see a drop in our monthly insurance premiums since our tax dollars will be used to insure the uninsured?

Maybe? Not sure. I do know that emergency care is more expensive then going to the doctor.

Another thing to consider is that those that do not have insurance, normally wait until things are pretty bad before they go into the emergency room. Something that could have been treated at an earlier stage is done at a later time for more money and more time.

Though, I don't know what percentage of visits by the uninsured would fall under that category.

So the answer is I would like to think that our premiums would decrease. Costs maybe reduced, but then, the insurance companies could also just keep the extra profit too... Honestly, all the theoretical stuff is just that. We won't really know until it is done.
 
GM/UAW is taking the same contract Chrysler/UAW signed, Lose of $70-$80 per month for the retired & lose of both dental & optical, I'm guessing but could be a trade w/the unions for their votes to save them money?
 
The whole thing with health care is a scam.
You want to see the cost of health care drop by over 40%?
Tort reform.
Almost half of every medical bill is to cover insurance to cover them from malpractice suits.
It cost billions to get any new meds to the market and then they have to have so much insurance the cost of the meds cost 2 to 3 times what it does in any country in the world.

There is no reason to let mommy and daddy government rule our medical coverage.
They need to STOP MEDLING IN THE PROCESS and it would make insurance cheap enough that anyone wanting it can get it.

If they stopped the whole "it's free so why pay" medical serive, you would see more people getting insurance. IF the government didn't feel the overriding need to k with everything, it would be cheap enough to afford. IF the government would cut off ALL medical services to illigals you would see a HUGE drop in the costs of medical bills.

There is no need for socialized medicine. We just need to get government OUT OF THE MEDICAL PROFESSION. Under the constitution the federal government has no power to regulate the medical profession.
 
READY, FIRE, AIM I just shake my head

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/business/economy/13leonhardt.html?_r=1&ref=politics

Democrats have suggested that they are willing to play hardball and pass a bill without Republican support. Arlen Specter, the senior Pennsylvania senator, became a Democrat, potentially adding one more vote. At the White House on Monday, lobbyists for doctors, insurers and other industry groups pledged to reduce the growth of medical spending.

Yet none of these developments has removed the main hurdle to health care reform: the matter of the missing $90 billion.

Providing health insurance to the roughly 50 million people without it will cost something like $120 billion a year. President Obama has proposed $60 billion or so in new revenue for this purpose — a “down payment,” his advisers say. But Congress seems set to reject about half of the down payment (a plan to limit high-income families’ tax deductions for charitable giving and other such things). That makes for the $90 billion health care hole.

And no one is quite sure how to fill it
 
Something had to give. We pay double for our health care than most countries and our infint mortality rate isn't even in the top 30. What we have now sucks. My 2 cents. My sister showed me some staggering stuff on the U.S. health care system. Look up infint mortality rates, average lifespans and stuff like that on snopes. In most measurements of quality of health care, we rank below the top 20.
 
Something had to give. We pay double for our health care than most countries and our infint mortality rate isn't even in the top 30. What we have now sucks. My 2 cents. My sister showed me some staggering stuff on the U.S. health care system. Look up infint mortality rates, average lifespans and stuff like that on snopes. In most measurements of quality of health care, we rank below the top 20.

Yep, our system isnt' that good.
Here's a couple questions about this though.

Why is it that it takes 6 - 10 years for the exact same medicine currently on the shelves in Europe before it hits the shelves in the US.

Why does the exact same medication cost 3 times more in the US?

How many billions does it cost the US to treat illigal aliens?

Why do US doctors have to spend 10's of thousands on insurance just because after the surgery their scar doesn't look pretty.

If socialized medicine is so great, why do thousands of Canadians come to the US for medical treatment?
 
They go to the emergency room, they get service and can not be refused. Then they don't pay for the service. Those that do pay, see an increase in prices to cover these costs. A hospital is business. They do it to make money.

So I guess a better statement would be we indirectly pay.

That is my thoughts on it anyways. Anyone think any different?

holy chit I agree with Ruffy! WTF! :confused::eek:
 
Lots of good comments here.

Here's my plan for reducing healthcare costs, and making it affordable for everyone.

1. Limit liability, but somehow replace it with responsibility. Even with huge insurance costs. hospitals and doctors routinely screw up. Staff infections should not even be possible, but yet they effect or kill 1 out of 20 patience.

2. Hospitals should not be liable for people who can't pay. And, can not pass costs of the uninsured on to their customers. I know it's cold hearted. But, if hospitals didn't treat the uninsured, costs would be 1/2 or 1/3 of current costs, and more people/companies could afford to offer insurance. It's a liberal catch 22, hold hospitals liable, so they must take on extra costs, that then must be passed on, that then make it too expensive to afford health care. It's wrong to charge some uninsured person 3 times the value of what he received, and bankrupt him, because the poor can not pay. It's WRONG.

3. Were pass the point of being able to afford the miracle drugs, the drug companies can produce. Yha, it's nice to have life saving drugs, but only the very well insured, or the extremely poor will be able to get them. Allow more generics, figure out a way to bring drugs to market quicker, and control costs. And, just try telling people no sometimes. Oh, and anyone caught abusing the drug system should be dealt with.

4. Finance medical care for the uninsured with private donations. If people are unwilling to give, then they have voted with their wallets. The federal government is not the supreme morality.

5. Pull the plug on people. Cold hearted sure, but there's 6.5 billion people on this planet, one won't be missed. No more superhuman effort to save murders, and drug junkies, and those that have thrown their lives away. Let the very old die in peace.

6. Provide more government clinics for the poor. Yha, there's no reason we can't catch things before they get bad. But, as a uninsured/poor person, you shouldn't expect the best doctors. And, this will allow us to show the real and actual cost of poor, uninsured, and illegals.

7. Encourage more people to get insurance coverage. If more people are covered, there will be less uninsured. But, this requires costs be reduced, mostly by not giving service to those that can't pay. And, limiting drugs and high cost services.

Oh, and about the infant mortality. That's a complicated question. Many people believe that the number of IVF (In Vitro Fertilization) in the US are the problem, and that since insurance doesn't cover the procedure (unlike Europe), people load up on eggs to increase the odds, where Europe limits the number of eggs. Thereby, greatly reducing the number of multiple births (twins or more), which have a much higher chance of dieing.

It also may have to do with the definition of infant mortality. The definitions are different in the US and Europe. If a baby dies right after birth, they call it a still born in Europe, a infant mortality in the US. Trivial sounding, but it all adds up. Plus there is something going on. African Americans have a huge infant mortality rate in this country.

And, it may also have to do with American's waiting till much later in life to have kids.
 
If socialized medicine is so great, why do thousands of Canadians come to the US for medical treatment?

Because they have enough money to pay outright for services that they want right away. I don't think that is the average response from a Canadian...
 
Premium Features



Back
Top