5 Freedoms You'll Lose In Health Care Reform

But government adheres to the lobbyist of now. As with all good ideas, it has become another system of capitalism. The government needs to regulate the costs, and not the other way around. Socialized medicine, albeit much less personal than seeing your friendly neighborhood doctor, can cut to the chase of matter than going through health care companies that have a penchant for astronomical profits. There are no humane ethics for these companies, only business. Most hospitals will not treat your wounds unless you have coverage. The point is, it's money first, treatment second. I had a laceration, without coverage on my arm many years ago, and I had to wait inline with my arm dripping blood on the floor for thirty minutes. Then it was paperwork first, no doctor. This would not happen in countries like France and England.

[edit on 28-7-2009 by AngelHeart]

Originally posted by AngelHeart
But government adheres to the lobbyist of now.

And this is going to magically stop when the government has full control?

As with all good ideas, it has become another system of capitalism.

No, just the opposite. How can it be capitalism when the government is already directly involved with mandates and regulations?

Again, why would you believe or want the government to control healthcare. We know how good they run medicare, medicare, VA hospitals, welfare & USPS just to name a few.

This is NOT the governments responsibility. Where in the Constitution does it say the government should control healthcare or that healthcare is a right?

reply to post by ag2000

I understand.
You have yours, which you are obviously happy with, and if whatever they pass isn't good enough for them then why should you be forced to sign on, right?
Absolutely valid and you'll get no further argument from me. You're right. If they end up passing a bill into law that excludes them from being a part of it, then I don't want in either.
But I think, like any employee who gets health benefits from work, they have a choice of PPO's to pick from.

I think Obama meant their health care is already paid for .... by us - the taxpayers. They don't go to the VA Hospitals or doctors (That's the only Government run health care system that I'm aware of)
So, I'm sure they will also have to be part of the system ... whatever form it takes.
If not, there will be many who side with you and that issue ... myself included.

reply to post by WhatTheory



on a side note...off topic....

www.cnbc.com...

on topic......

I don't think you understand.....
we are the nation......even if the mess was created by the gov 't, it needs we, the people, going along with it to create a disaster! you need those in society who are willing to willing to find the loopholes, discover a way to exploit them and well.....rake in the money!!!

www.newyorker.com...

like these doctors appear to have done!!

like those in the banking industry appear to have done!!!

like, they would all be doing more of, if the gov't just lifted all regulations and let them go on their way relying on them to use own moral integrity to direct them to serve their communities instead of their greedy impulses!

ya...let's pull the social welfare programs, for individuals and the business sector...they are all being exploited beyond belief by those amoung us that would put profit in their pockets above the welfare of this nation! let's close the taps, force employers to pay a living wage to their employees, force those who market the necessities of life to bring the costs of these necessities down to something we find affordable!! it's the only way it's gonna happen! gov't regulations and programs ain't gonna do it, the danged lobbyists will just stay in washington long enough to make sure the lawmakers don't regulate in a way that has a negative impact on the parasites, the lawyers will just find the loopholes and ways to exploit any new regulations that come into effect. and well, forget about people's moral integrity!! they have none!!!

but.....
the gov't did not write any law that forced banks to make risky loans!! those risky loans became valuable commodities that could be quickly turned over for a nice profit, the risk moved far away from the ones involved with originating the loan!!
and the gov't has not written any laws forcing doctors into surgically remove gallstones, or tonsils, for no reason! or to come up with these great scams where one introduces perfectly healthy patient to perfectly corrupt doctor, who then proceeds to do completely unnecessary proceedures on patient, then lie on the bill as to what was done, why it was done, ect....and the three rake in and split the profit!

that's the people, not the government! people who can work, but don't want to, so hey, they find a way where they don't have to.....
businesses, doctors, ect....who will exploit them, charge more, and well.....get nice sums of money from programs to "aid the poor".....

well.....the programs themselves aren't bad, have good intentions behind them.....
but the people, well, that's another story...

used to send lots of letter out to the government about all this, but then I came to this conclusion....
it doesn't matter what the gov't does really...if people treat people fairly, if they'd just take that golden rule to heart.....well, things would be grand!

but, if people want to act like greedy self rightous jerks, it doesn't matter what the gov't does either.....they are gonna find a way to act like greedy self rightous jerks!

WE ARE THE NATION!!

Originally posted by dawnstar
on a side note...off topic....

Why are you going off topic?
I cannot read your link because work will not allow me to view that site so I cannot comment on it.

like, they would all be doing more of, if the gov't just lifted all regulations and let them go on their way relying on them to use own moral integrity to direct them to serve their communities instead of their greedy impulses!

Do you actually believe with suffocating total government control there will be no greedy impulses?
People are people and you will always have some greedy folks in whatever system. So why have these same people in a government controlled system? It makes no sense.

You are yapping about people being a nation, yet you don't want your freedom. You want government control from cradle to grave. You keep contradicting yourself.

the gov't did not write any law that forced banks to make risky loans!!

You still don't get it. They forced the banks to do this not by legislation but by force of legislation. Meaning, if you don't comply we will regulate and legislate you out of business. They blackmailed them. Barney Frank practically admitted it during some Congressional hearing or event. I will see if I can find the YouTube video later as I don't have access to YouTube from work.

reply to post by WhatTheory

I keep telling ya what I want.....
I want them to pull every cent they have out of the social/corporate welfare machine.....
no more tax money for student aid, welfare, food stamps, "job creation" programs, drug developement, doctor, nurse training.....
the whole shabang!!! let the government retreat back into the little box that the constitution originally put them in!!

I don't think it's gonna work, but well, I am the type of person, when facing a problem that I can't find a solution to, well, I have a tendancy to just throw a wrench into the gears and bring the whole thing down, figuring it would be easier to just rebuild the whole thing again than it would be to figure out how to fix the beast!

go ahead, pull the funds....ya, let me know when they plan on announcing it on tv, I'll stay home from work that day just to watch the stock markets crash!!
but, I am telling ya know, it won't have the results you claim it will have!

as far as "freedom" goes...
I am sorry to inform you of this, but Freedom and Independence run hand in hand. you can't be all for freedom, and yet, be against the idea that a company should be paying their employees enough to live on (or be all gun hoe in support of the religious idea that men and women have different roles and mom should be home with kids while dad supports her) since that places people in a state of dependence, thus interfers with their freedom, and yet, I bet you are against the minimum wage laws, aren't ya?



[edit on 28-7-2009 by dawnstar]

Because ideologically it's the government's responsibility to help those who cannot help themselves

Originally posted by dawnstar
I want them to pull every cent they have out of the social/corporate welfare machine.....
no more tax money for student aid, welfare, food stamps, "job creation" programs, drug developement, doctor, nurse training.....
the whole shabang!!! let the government retreat back into the little box that the constitution originally put them in!!

Even though you don't mean it, that is exactly what the government should do.

I am telling ya know, it won't have the results you claim it will have!

Well, if you say so I guess it must be true.

Of course it would have the desired effect eventually. It will not happen overnight but once government gets put back in their box, things will improve greatly.

I bet you are against the minimum wage laws, aren't ya?

Of course. I can't wait to pay $10 for a burger because minimum wage will be so high, prices will skyrocket and more people will get laid off because businesses cannot afford the extra payout.

I realize this is a difficult thing to understand but increasing minimum wage has the opposite effect of what you are looking for in raising it.

Here, educate yourself:
Rising Minimum Wage

Economic effects

Originally posted by AngelHeart
Because ideologically it's the government's responsibility to help those who cannot help themselves

No it's not. That is ridiculous.
It is up to family, friends and charities to help those who cannot help themselves.

reply to post by LatentElement

I understand. You have yours, which you are obviously happy with, and if whatever they pass isn't good enough for them then why should you be forced to sign on, right? Absolutely valid and you'll get no further argument from me. You're right. If they end up passing a bill into law that excludes them from being a part of it, then I don't want in either. But I think, like any employee who gets health benefits from work, they have a choice of PPO's to pick from.

Thank you for the response. I wouldn't say I am happy with my plan, not unhappy either, but I just don't use it. I get sick about once every 5 or 6 years with something that I need to see a doctor for. Not that I am so great or anything...I just don't get sick for some reason.

My issue with this whole fiasco is that this plan would give the government a decision in our personal healthcare. That is just wrong. I fully understand that insurance companies do this ( and I think they need to reformed somehow) but letting the government butt their nose into it just goes against everything I thought this country stood for.

I personally have no issue with the money (tax) aspect of this. Not to say I want to be taxed more, but at least it would be going to help people. But I just can't get over the government being involved at the decision level, which they will be. I have no doubt that my 96 year old grandfather would not be here today if we already had this plan. He is healthy, lives on his own, works in his garden, walks 3 miles a day ( in the south Texas heat), receives no government assistance...But he does have a pacemaker that was replaced 4 years ago. It wasn't cheap but has allowed him to continue living a good life. It just sickens me to think that some bean counter in DC would have denied him that.


[edit on 28-7-2009 by ag2000]

reply to post by sligtlyskeptical


Why ban them from emergency room services, it's not done now ? If they have to go to the emergency room for a true medical emergency (which i did a couple of years ago) if possible (time wise) they can go to the county hospital (which i did) that is paid for by county taxes that everybody (including me) already pays, and your charged by what you can afford. Even in non-county hospitals people are not turned away in a true emergency, they are billed and though i understand that some never pay the bill, there are those that do though it may take years to do they still pay the bill.

Believe me i understand the need for health care reform in this country. Before i lost my job it cost me $1,320 a year for my insurance and prescription coverage (which was a lot for my income level) that did me no good because i couldn't afford the co payments, nor could i afford my asthma meds, i just payed for the insurance in case i needed to go to the hospital.

My problem first and foremost is forced coverage, i just don't believe that the government belongs in every aspect of our lives.

Secondly i don't agree with (if this part goes into effect) that since i am currently unemployed i will be forceably enrolled in medicaid and if i am lucky enough to find a job with very good benefits i will not be able to switch my coverage.

And finally, i think , their healthcare reform consists of forcing taxpayers to fork over more money than we already do. It's unfair for a person that is already paying for their own coverage, and even now for other people's coverage to have to pay even more than they do now. Many people barely make enough to survive as it is and they want to take more of our money and expect us to happily agree to it.

I don't have a problem in the world with my taxes going to help people that truely need it. But honestly i am sick to death of living like a pauper while the government forces me to help people that are just plain too lazy to get a job, or work under the table while collecting every benefit possible, and believe me there are a lot of them. Take a good look around and really see all of those people that live better than most, off of other people's taxes. There are just too many people that are itching to take advantage of this new healthcare reform. And NO i don't feel that it is my responsibility to pay for benefits for people that are in this country illegally.

Do you really think I'm happy paying $1500.00/month with a $2500/year deductible, and having to may $720 every 3 months for anesthesia for an out-patient procedure to put me under while someone runs a camera down my throat to see if I have cancer yet, or not??? GIVE ME GOVERNMENT HEALTH CARE, PLEASE... It can't be any worse, and sure won't cost as much cash outofpocket.

Pretty good article here which looks at both sides of the argument although from a liberal point of view.

The healthcare and welfare system in the US (or lack of it) always reminds me of Social Darwinism and can be said to be a form of eugenics in that the strong (who don't need medical care and welfare) are expected to afford cover, whilst the weak or less fortunate cannot and according to some on here should not get welfare or healthcare unless they can afford it.

So we have the situation where the insurance companies only insure those who don't need it, whilst the rest rely on inferior handouts.

20th and 21st century eugenics folks - this is the way they weed out the weak to keep the country strong

A culture can only truly be called civilized when it is able and willing to look after its weakest members.

Or perhaps we could be like the bushmen of the Kalahari, and just leave folks behind to starve when they are no longer able to keep up or contribute.

reply to post by WhatTheory


well....let me get this straight....
you want the social programs gone....and us taxpayers to reap the rewards of that...
you know that it might cause a little chaos to begin with but well, it will straighten itself out....
and well, no, you aren't for higher wages, you don't want to pay $10 for the big mac, and you just know you will be if companies actually had to pay that much.....

okay....do you want someone making the big mac from sunup to past sundown, for you to enjoy? do you want the little cashiers in the stores available 24 hours a day, to cash out your groceries??
and don't we all just love it when one of those burger flippers gets sick and still goes to work and spreads hepatitis all around???

we want these people there, doing what they are doing, in many cases, we need them doing what they are doing....
but, well, many of them are depending on those gov't handouts to fill the gaps that their checks leave in their budgets....heck, cut child care assistance, and see out many drop out of the workforce! I mean, no one in their right mind is gonna pay nine or more dollars and hours for childcare for their kids, when they are making less than nine in wages! either way, you will have three choices to chose from, either pay them what they need to survive through the social programs, pay them what they need to survive through higher prices, less profit for the companies, or well, don't pay them and live with the fact that they are hungry, or homeless, or sick, and well, live with the crappy service that hungry, homeless sick people provide for ya, that's if they don't just say heck with it, find a job that pays what they need, or well, just give up and leave society, or die!

this is about what the situation is in california now, and well, alot of the nation will be facing soon. the government helped cause the mess, the gov't, through all these programs, well, they have the most clout at the moment to initiate change.
instead of just cutting all these programs, and letting you keep your money.....
well, I would begin slowly decreasing the programs, the savings going toward the businesses, in exchange for a little higher wages. all this money that goes to businesses for "job creation" would have a few more strings attached, namely, you want the money, well, don't let us find anyone in your company making over $100,000 or $200,000 unless the rest of the employees are making ends meet on their own, and not on the welfare rolls. I would remove the cap from social security, let all the income be taxed, or just do away with the social security program all together, and bring all these aide programs into one program. no more food stamps, no more hud, no more medicaid, you need money, well, here is the money...spend it wisely, or else go without! and I would put those that provide the necessities of life on notice! start cutting the cost of these items, because well, the parties ending soon. I has to end there is no way it can keep going like this!

as far as what I want them to do with the healthcare system.
well, I've been pretty consistant all along...
either take measures to ensure that all that really need the help get it, or just stop giving the industry the money! the gov't has no business picking and chosing amonst all those who need the help (and with unemployment still growing, well, that number will just keep rising), they have no business who is worthy of life and who isn't! that is a bad responsible to lay on a government, it is sure to be misused, and it has been!

but, the current system isn't acceptable to me, the idea that anyone who needs care can just go to the emergency room and get it so all is well is either an urban myth or a downright lie!! and well, that is what I mainly contested in your posting, wasn't it??

in our current economic state, I don't think we can help all those who need it, it's time to turn off the taps!! maybe if the healthcare industry actually thinks that we are serious, they will do something to get their costs down! god knows there is plenty that they could do, if they thought their industry was gonna tank soon....
and it would, without the massive infusion of tax money flowing into it!

ya know, we recently had a local insurance company get put under recievership.....seems they had lost alot of money went the financial sector went down...bad investments.....

I wonder how many more insurance companies are in the same boat??

could it be......that all this newfound interest in overhauling our healthcare system is just another massive bailout, this one aimed at the insurance industry?

I don't know enough about what the dems and obama wants to do, hear alot, but well.....who knows what is true, and what is just people playing their political agendas...
but, whenever they speak up and say, hey, anyone who needs medical attention just has to go to the emergency room, and they will be taken care of....
I know that is an untruth.....and I listen no further!

Originally posted by dawnstar
I don't know enough about what the dems and obama wants to do, hear alot, but well.....who knows what is true, and what is just people playing their political agendas...

All you have to do is read.
Here is a link which lists some of the shocking parts in the bill plus a link to the bill for you to read and see for yourself.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

As far as the rest of your previous long winded post, I have no idea what you were trying to say.

reply to post by WhatTheory


oh, well.....
got to run off and put in my 8 hours...you'll have to wait for the revised version...
but, well, by what I understand...
obama wants to force the employers to provide coverage as a benefit...
a clear indication to me that he just doesn't get it!!

and well, a perk for you....
the fact that all are reliant on employers for affordable healthcare is also a direct result I believe from....
gov't actions of the pa st!Q!

maybe if you go back and try to read what I posted, you might have better luck?

Originally posted by dawnstar
oh, well.....
got to run off and put in my 8 hours...you'll have to wait for the revised version...

I don't know where you work but get some damn good healthcare coverage from them.

obama wants to force the employers to provide coverage as a benefit...
a clear indication to me that he just doesn't get it!!

I agree.

the fact that all are reliant on employers for affordable healthcare is also a direct result I believe from....
gov't actions of the pa st!Q!

I agree.
It started with the HMO act back in the 70's which mandated to employers that they offer HMO and PPO plans. I listed several links regarding this issue several posts back.

Here are the links:
Link1 - Wiki

History of HMO's


[edit on 7/29/2009 by WhatTheory]

reply to post by WhatTheory


my boss does his best when it comes to healthcare, and well....it's still pretty crappy insurance....
and well....when I said that it was gov't actions that put the employer in the position of healthcare provider for his employees, well, that goes back a little further than the 70"s....

try more like, maybe the 50's if not earlier than that??

I'll hunt around and see if I can't find what I am talking about...but well, it's something like, the government decided to restrict people's salaries and such or something like that, and well, providing health coverage was a way for the employer to bypass the rules...or something like that. but like I said, I r eally ain't sure what I am talking about at the moment, maybe someone will pop on and clearify, I'll check around...

Health insurance as an employee benefit was offered through both unions and employers beginning in the 1930s. Wartime regulation froze wages in the 1940s but did not freeze benefits, so health insurance spread as an employment incentive. These plans paid directly to providers, but as costs increased, the plans placed restrictions on the amount they would pay for procedures. Physicians regarded this as an intrusion into the doctor-patient relationship. Employers seeking to further contain health care expenditures opted for managed care facilities that were both insurer and provider, so that by the end of the 1990s, most insured Americans were enrolled in managed care.

www.ehow.com...

it was the gov't involvement in the 40's to address a shortage of labor, and the high wages the competition between the companies were creating, that made healthcare coverage a common benefit for employees...
hmos and such had nothing to do with it....and the government obviously isn't forcing all the employers to offer healthcare as a benefit through any legislation made in the 70's, since well....
these employers are opting out of providing it in droves because it's just too danged expensive...

but, I know....it's all the dems fault.....
even if we have to twist history to make it so.

Originally posted by dawnstar
hmos and such had nothing to do with it

Managed care plans are HMO's. The governments goal by introducing and forcing managed care plans was to eliminate individual health insurance.

but, I know....it's all the dems fault.....
even if we have to twist history to make it so.

You got that right and no twisting in necessary. Every major government social program like welfare was a product of the dems and every one of these programs are failures with nothing but waste, fraud and bloated budgets.

[edit on 7/30/2009 by WhatTheory]