Mad Dawg Wiccan
Administrator
Rest in Peace
Only Bites Whiners
Joined: Jan 12, 2011 20:40:24 GMT -5
Posts: 9,693
|
Post by Mad Dawg Wiccan on Jan 31, 2011 16:58:26 GMT -5
Voters overwhelmingly want to see last year’s health care law changed, but there is substantial disagreement about how best to do it. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 75% of Likely U.S. Voters want to change the law, while only 18% want it left alone. Those figures include 20% who want the law repealed and nothing done to replace it, 28% who want it repealed and then have its most popular provisions put into a new law and 27% who say leave the law in place but get rid of the unpopular provisions. www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/january_2011/75_want_health_care_law_changed
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 31, 2011 17:30:01 GMT -5
Since most of us really don't know what will happen if it wasn't in effect, will costs continue to rise as it was suggested, thus one of the reasons to have it, or the uninsured, just leave them uninsured as they are now.
While your figures if correct, probably are, but if you notice it's almost like the feeling what is wanted is in quarters..25 % for four different scenarios and for those who want the most popular features left, can you have that with out the enrolling of all in the plan?
Costs come into play..spreading the cost from those who won't use it as much, medical to pay for those who will.
Since no one knows who will need care till one needs it..how do you opt out or in...and for those who say just leave me with what I have, company programs, it was suggested that because of rising costs, more and more companies would be doing away with company coverage or if still offer it, their contribution will continue to be less and less and more and more of the premiums will be passed to the worker, happening now.
|
|
sesfw
Junior Associate
Today is the first day of the rest of my life
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 15:45:17 GMT -5
Posts: 6,268
|
Post by sesfw on Jan 31, 2011 18:12:46 GMT -5
I want the whole bill recinded. The parts of the bill that are good can be reviewed and re-submitted. This way the bill(s) will be READ before passing.
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Jan 31, 2011 19:07:51 GMT -5
We need to address one primary issue health care costs. Health care is a service industry and the only real way to reduce costs is competition, and I think we need to remove the 3rd party from paying for the service. Let the patient directly pay the provider (with the poor getting money from the state for this purpose) and insurance to cover catastrophic events like insurance normally should work.
|
|
SweetVirginia
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 17:56:15 GMT -5
Posts: 1,360
|
Post by SweetVirginia on Jan 31, 2011 23:00:53 GMT -5
Voters overwhelmingly want to see last year’s health care law changed, but there is substantial disagreement about how best to do it. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 75% of Likely U.S. Voters want to change the law, while only 18% want it left alone. Those figures include 20% who want the law repealed and nothing done to replace it, 28% who want it repealed and then have its most popular provisions put into a new law and 27% who say leave the law in place but get rid of the unpopular provisions. quote]
75% might be true. I am one of the voters who would want Obama care law changed, but not for the same reasons as the Tea Partiers or the right winged loonies. I do not think that "Obamacare" goes far enough. Obama should have pushed harder for a public option. I am one who would support medicare for anyone over the age of 55, maybe younger!
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 31, 2011 23:13:22 GMT -5
" Obama should have pushed harder for a public option. " Don't blame Obama on that part..he could have pushed as hard as he could..he did not have the votes with the public option..so if he pushed , the bill wouldn't have passed. Lieberman was a crucial vote , he was 110 %, if there is such a figure against the public option, possible because of the Insurence industry and one of the largest in the health care in the country, home office there, Connecticut, or just because he didn't want it... Sometimes you have to compromise and count your losses..that one was one that would have kept the bill from passing. -------------------------------------------------------- "right winged loonies." Oooohhh...your in trouble now, you are , you are.
|
|
SweetVirginia
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 17:56:15 GMT -5
Posts: 1,360
|
Post by SweetVirginia on Jan 31, 2011 23:26:00 GMT -5
Don't blame Obama on that part..he could have pushed as hard as he could..he did not have the votes with the public option..so if he pushed , the bill wouldn't have passed.
I would have been fine with the bill not passing. I feel that the bill was a giant tax funded gift to the greedy health care insurance companies. I am happy that children can now be covered if they have a pre existing condition (though I am sure the ins co's will find a way around that) and I am glad that 25 year old students can be covered through their parents (my kid will be off to college this year) but I still think this bill is a big corporate gift and without a public option, it simply sucks.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Jan 31, 2011 23:31:35 GMT -5
That's kind of sad and it reinforces the idea that American kids in the 21st century are lazy, stupid freeloaders. When I was 25, I was already married, owned two homes and had a career (with health benefits). I was also going to grad school at that time...and this wasn't back in grandpa's America. This was the late 1990s...
|
|
SweetVirginia
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 17:56:15 GMT -5
Posts: 1,360
|
Post by SweetVirginia on Jan 31, 2011 23:40:29 GMT -5
That's kind of sad and it reinforces the idea that American kids in the 21st century are lazy, stupid freeloaders. When I was 25, I was already married, owned two homes and had a career (with health benefits). I was also going to grad school at that time...and this wasn't back in grandpa's America. This was the late 1990s... That is you eddie. Why do you think that you have to set the "norm?" College is more expensive and harder to afford than ever before. There are lots of young adults out there who have no choice but to work 1 or more jobs to earn money for college, and they may not be able to get through college and grad school within 5 years from graduating from high school. And just because you were already married when you were 25 does not make that right. I think you were way too young to be married. That is my opinion. It is your opinion that a 25 year old should be married, own two homes and be in grad school. That is simply your opinion and your circumstance. You do not set the norm for the United States of America eddie, nor do I. Bottom line is, if a young adult is a full time student, and performing well in college, I think it is good that he or she be covered medically under their parent's insurance. Not all 25 year olds have a college fund or are impulsive enough to be married and in debted so young.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 31, 2011 23:48:55 GMT -5
That's kind of sad and it reinforces the idea that American kids in the 21st century are lazy, stupid freeloaders. When I was 25, I was already married, owned two homes and had a career (with health benefits). I was also going to grad school at that time...and this wasn't back in grandpa's America. This was the late 1990s... That was you..many are still in school..or with companies where there is no Insurence or some who are just out of work..jobs are tough you know...think it's 26 not 25..covered till.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 31, 2011 23:50:52 GMT -5
That's kind of sad and it reinforces the idea that American kids in the 21st century are lazy, stupid freeloaders. When I was 25, I was already married, owned two homes and had a career (with health benefits). I was also going to grad school at that time...and this wasn't back in grandpa's America. This was the late 1990s... That is you eddie. Why do you think that you have to set the "norm?" College is more expensive and harder to afford than ever before. There are lots of young adults out there who have no choice but to work 1 or more jobs to earn money for college, and they may not be able to get through college and grad school within 5 years from graduating from high school. And just because you were already married when you were 25 does not make that right. I think you were way too young to be married. That is my opinion. It is your opinion that a 25 year old should be married, own two homes and be in grad school. That is simply your opinion and your circumstance. You do not set the norm for the United States of America eddie, nor do I. Bottom line is, if a young adult is a full time student, and performing well in college, I think it is good that he or she be covered medically under their parent's insurance. Not all 25 year olds have a college fund or are impulsive enough to be married and in debted so young. Think we were thinking along the same lines...
|
|
SweetVirginia
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 17:56:15 GMT -5
Posts: 1,360
|
Post by SweetVirginia on Jan 31, 2011 23:56:48 GMT -5
I think we were dezi. : )
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Feb 1, 2011 0:01:04 GMT -5
LOL! I worked two jobs in college to pay for my education so I wouldn't graduate with a lot of debt. I never said it should be the norm, although if it was, we would be a hell of a lot more competitive in the world than we are now...the idea of a "full time" student is a joke. Going to school is not a full time job. I took 15-18 units every quarter, and I still had time for two jobs.
|
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Feb 1, 2011 0:06:03 GMT -5
I think we were dezi. : )
If you two decide to get a room I can help you with any unintended consequences.
< If you have me retained you never have to over think it, just let loose and sink it. >
canattorneyyou
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Feb 1, 2011 0:11:43 GMT -5
LOL! I worked two jobs in college to pay for my education so I wouldn't graduate with a lot of debt. I never said it should be the norm, although if it was, we would be a hell of a lot more competitive in the world than we are now...the idea of a "full time" student is a joke. Going to school is not a full time job. I took 15-18 units every quarter, and I still had time for two jobs. Speaking of "college debt", I think the easy access to credit/school loans has actually caused the cost of college to rise out of proportion to normal inflation.
|
|
SweetVirginia
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 17:56:15 GMT -5
Posts: 1,360
|
Post by SweetVirginia on Feb 1, 2011 0:15:12 GMT -5
LOL! I worked two jobs in college to pay for my education so I wouldn't graduate with a lot of debt. I never said it should be the norm, although if it was, we would be a hell of a lot more competitive in the world than we are now...the idea of a "full time" student is a joke. Going to school is not a full time job. I took 15-18 units every quarter, and I still had time for two jobs. So what eddie? Does that make you any better than the average college student? No it does not. I was serving in the 1st Gulf War when I was 19 and 20. Does that make me any better than the average 19 to 20 year old or better than you? No it does not. Because of my service, I received the GI bill which helped pay for some of my college expenses (not all by any means.) I too was married young. (which I now think was a poor decision) I was raising a child when I was 23. I had my own medical coverage and paid my own bills without any assistance from my parents or anyone else. The point is, college is way more expensive today than ever before, even than the late 90's. It is taking longer for students to graduate and find gainful employment with medical benefits. Therefore, I think it is beneficial that these young people be able to get the medical care they may need (most dont need care) You are not as exceptional as you think ed. There are plenty of us out there who worked hard, served, paid bills, had insurance, etc by the time we were 25. Times are harder now.
|
|
SweetVirginia
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 17:56:15 GMT -5
Posts: 1,360
|
Post by SweetVirginia on Feb 1, 2011 0:16:14 GMT -5
I think we were dezi. : )If you two decide to get a room I can help you with any unintended consequences. < If you have me retained you never have to over think it, just let loose and sink it. > canattorneyyou You simply sound desperate burns. Get a grip.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 1, 2011 0:17:43 GMT -5
LOL! I worked two jobs in college to pay for my education so I wouldn't graduate with a lot of debt. I never said it should be the norm, although if it was, we would be a hell of a lot more competitive in the world than we are now...the idea of a "full time" student is a joke. Going to school is not a full time job. I took 15-18 units every quarter, and I still had time for two jobs. Close friend of mines daughter , wanted to be a doctor, was 5 points below in the test to take to get into a medical school in states..went to Ireland, Trinity College in Dublin, 5 years, just graduated this year..only a bit over $300 thousand in debt.. I had two years of college then entered service...dumb me where they sent me..but the GI was helpful when I got back, but would have been smarter to forgo that pleasure and studied harder, so many never had the chance to do what i did..funny how good a student you become with a little life experience..Deans list most semesters. No ed , you are not unique in any way.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Feb 1, 2011 0:34:31 GMT -5
No they are not, that's just a cheap excuse. When I graduated college in the mid 1990s, the economy sucked, so I joined the Army. That's right, I joined after college, no GI Bill or signing bonuses or anything else. I went because there was little else to do at the time. I don't think I'm exceptional at all, I think my story should be the average kid's experience. The ones who do less are slacking in my opinion...
|
|
SweetVirginia
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 17:56:15 GMT -5
Posts: 1,360
|
Post by SweetVirginia on Feb 1, 2011 0:55:10 GMT -5
No they are not, that's just a cheap excuse. When I graduated college in the mid 1990s, the economy sucked, so I joined the Army. That's right, I joined after college, no GI Bill or signing bonuses or anything else. I went because there was little else to do at the time. I don't think I'm exceptional at all, I think my story should be the average kid's experience. The ones who do less are slacking in my opinion... I rest my case ed. You do think that you are entitled to set the "norm" just because of your circumstances, well you are not. Everyone is different. And you are not much different than many young people who join the armed services. You did so because you had little economic choice, you said so yourself. The Army provided you with pay every 1st and 15th, and it provided you with government run health care. That you cannot deny. So maybe you were not being provided with care under your mommy and daddy, but you were getting care from the tax payers, as was I while I served. You should get off your high horse.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Feb 1, 2011 1:06:47 GMT -5
I'm not on a high horse, I don't know why you are so hostile. All I'm saying is that I went to college, I served my country and I got on with my life, and I think all the furor over insurance companies or the government or whoever having to support "children" well into their adulthood is ridiculous. It contributes to the already massive sense of entitlement a lot of 20-somethings have. It's one of the reasons we are so far behind other countries in the global economy...
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 1, 2011 1:22:39 GMT -5
I'm not on a high horse, I don't know why you are so hostile. All I'm saying is that I went to college, I served my country and I got on with my life, and I think all the furor over insurance companies or the government or whoever having to support "children" well into their adulthood is ridiculous. It contributes to the already massive sense of entitlement a lot of 20-somethings have. It's one of the reasons we are so far behind other countries in the global economy... And some years from now , if your kids find them selves for what ever reason uninsured, with out a job, or a job with no insurence, if Obama Care is not here and no insurence available , yet the ability to keep the parents insurence till 26 is in effect, you tell them, sorry I don't believe in that thus not keeping you on the Insurence..suggest you don't get sick.
|
|
SweetVirginia
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 17:56:15 GMT -5
Posts: 1,360
|
Post by SweetVirginia on Feb 1, 2011 1:24:30 GMT -5
I'm not on a high horse, I don't know why you are so hostile. All I'm saying is that I went to college, I served my country and I got on with my life, and I think all the furor over insurance companies or the government or whoever having to support "children" well into their adulthood is ridiculous. It contributes to the already massive sense of entitlement a lot of 20-somethings have. It's one of the reasons we are so far behind other countries in the global economy... The insurance companies are hardly supporting the 20 somethings ed. Those 20 somethings who are full time students, have parents who are paying premiums (as well as employers are paying) in order to cover these young adults. Most of these young people do not even need any care, and most do not seek medical care. So the insurance companies are getting premiums and not having to provide much care in return. I can see why you think I am hostile, but in reality, I am simply annoyed at your attempt to come off as better than most young people just because of your particular circumstances. Were you complaining when you were enjoying government run health care via the Army? I doubt it. You and I chose to serve, other young people make different choices and have different circumstances. There is nothing wrong with young college students being included in their parents' private health care insurance. That does not make these young people leeches, or lazy. They just took a different route to adult hood than you and I did.
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Feb 1, 2011 9:13:36 GMT -5
While everyone has their own story to tell and most consider theirs to be "normal" the bigger concern being expressed by ed and many others in this country is that we continue to move more segments of the population to "receivers" instead of "producers" and as this happens people in general start to feel like they are entitled to benefits and support that previous generations never received. In the real world the most successful people are usually the ones who had to work for what they got, who were motivated by the "American Dream" and took advantage of this land of opportunity, pulled themselves through the hard times by their boot straps and came out feeling like they had accomplished something of value. It's hard for people who have done this to really appreciate or understand the mind set of people who feel making it "easy" for their children will somehow make them better or more productive people. Now just because a (child at 26?) is allowed to stay on their parents health insurance policy will probably not forever alter the outcome of the child but it is just a trend that seems to lead away from personal responsibility.
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Feb 1, 2011 9:39:38 GMT -5
...yeah, I'm a repealer... ;D
|
|
vonnie6200
Senior Member
Adopt a Shelter Pet
Joined: Jan 8, 2011 14:07:17 GMT -5
Posts: 2,199
|
Post by vonnie6200 on Feb 1, 2011 9:47:52 GMT -5
While everyone has their own story to tell and most consider theirs to be "normal" the bigger concern being expressed by ed and many others in this country is that we continue to move more segments of the population to "receivers" instead of "producers" and as this happens people in general start to feel like they are entitled to benefits and support that previous generations never received. In the real world the most successful people are usually the ones who had to work for what they got, who were motivated by the "American Dream" and took advantage of this land of opportunity, pulled themselves through the hard times by their boot straps and came out feeling like they had accomplished something of value. It's hard for people who have done this to really appreciate or understand the mind set of people who feel making it "easy" for their children will somehow make them better or more productive people. Now just because a (child at 26?) is allowed to stay on their parents health insurance policy will probably not forever alter the outcome of the child but it is just a trend that seems to lead away from personal responsibility. Very well put!
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Feb 1, 2011 14:17:46 GMT -5
No, I have no issue if it's a private insurer and they want to accept the burden. The problem is when it becomes mandatory, when the government gets involved (as they plan to), and when taxpayers start picking up the bill. You know as well as I, when we served in the armed forces, we earned our keep. I never felt like I was taking advantage of a system when I was freezing my ass off in a ditch practicing artillery drills, and I'm sure you didn't either. On the other hand, a 25-year old still working on his 2-year degree, living at home and spending most of his time getting high and playing video games IS taking advantage of a system, and I have a problem with that if I am footing the bill.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 1, 2011 14:56:00 GMT -5
"spending most of his time getting high and playing video games IS taking advantage of a system, and I have a problem with that if I am footing the bill. ' --------------------------------------------------------------------- What bill are you paying?
The parent is paying their family plan share, the children covered are just extended.
Since most are healthy, young, the majority would not be a actuary problem in occurrence of illnesses, just a extension.
Me thinks you just like to be argumentative on any, all and everything.
While not wanting to get into your set up with family, I get the idea there is not much discussion there, more of ' It is what it is because I, the ed, says that is what it is, case closed "
You have a degree, went on in schooling? mmmm Surprised there , I find a lot of your reasoning the reasoning of one who has not been exposed to that benefit..but one never knows what one gets from that occurrence I guess , but still....
As far as getting high, video games..comments like that and so many other of your comments , just reinforce my feelings on your alleged higher educating claims.
Sorry, it just does, because comments out of the blue like that are just so dumb and sorry to say, just plain stupid.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Feb 1, 2011 15:07:16 GMT -5
75% Want Obamacare Law Changed
And don't forget all the states Attorney Generals who have filed law suits to repeal Obamacare which now means it will be decided by the SCOTUS before it is fully enacted or possibly repealed by the senate if the senate dems cross party lines and go against Reid and Obama....so Obamacare is one big political football
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Feb 1, 2011 15:38:34 GMT -5
Read my post again, and I think you don't understand how the Obamacare proposal works. I'm not talking about private insurance, I specifically said that in my message...if a family wants to keep their little slackers on their private insurance forever, I don't care, as long as I'm not picking up any portion of the bill...
|
|