Here is another national story.
Re-posted with permission from the AP.
Democrats are saying that protests against health care are being orchestrated by high-ranking republicans, insurance companies and other activists.
Does it matter who is behind the protests?
Are the protests based more on emotion than fact ?
Here is the link to the AP story, which I thought was a fair story.
I saw a short clip of some of the protests. The one I liked was when a woman was asking if the Congress who are proposing the healthcare bill would be subject to the same provisions it contained?
ReplyDeleteI think the thing that is bothering a lot of citizens (especially now during the downturn in the economy) is that they don't see a leadership that understands or really cares - except about their agendas.
Its kind of hard to feel sorry for some of the representatives when they just appropiated money for new luxury jets for their travel and made fun of the Auto executives and theirs.
I am afraid they have lost what the original vision of America was all about - I hope we don't have to lose it and then try and regain it!
The elected were to represent all the people not just themselves!
and
If you don't have the money just borrow it from your kids!
Isn't that kind of backwards?
I hear the concerns and criticisms regularly from coworkers. Most energy company employees tend to be against the health-care reform. They all have decent health-care even though, when pinned down admit that in the past two decades they are paying a lot more premium for a lot less coverage.
ReplyDeleteStill, I await someone to discuss how to meet the needs in some humanitarian way of folks who have NO coverage. It is the tendency to brand all uninsured as impoverished and unemployed.
However, a notable population of uninsured ARE employed but work for small businesses or family owned businesses that could not offer insurance as benefit and make payroll or cover accounts payable.
Point is, in a nation that fights and protests and even guns down to defend the unborn, what is our duty of decency to folks who are facing life crisis in health but cannot get treatment because of no insurance.
What do we do for them in the name of decency? I hear the outcries in opposition. I am just wondering how many little kids will have to have neighbors sell hotdogs to pay for their transplant before we look for something that reflects human compassion.
How many fund raisers have we held here in Ark City - a community of approx 10,000. Then think of that same ratio played out in every metro area in this nation. That's tens of thousands of children. If you fight to bring them into this world, can't we do something to keep them here too? And what worse time could someone pick to send a person around begging for aide than when they are fighting a major health event.
Let’s see. In the morning the doctor tells you that you have cancer. Forget trying to process the news. Those without insurance must get busy that same afternoon trying to rally funds to pay for treatment, prescriptions and the cost of traveling around IF you find a specialist somewhere who won’t care about getting paid. What will America do?
Good Post Charles!
ReplyDeleteThe point is where do you put your priorities?
With all the people and groups who can lobby for their respective agendas. Who represents the aveage citizen?
But, the bigger question that has to be answered is - What happened to the Old America - the land of opportunity? Where it was possible to make and pay your own way?
It gave way to the atttiude that you owe me and I don't have to do anything to get it!
You/We can do that to a point but with the impending baby boom generation retiring - which we have only known about for how long - and the invasion of illegals - then the destruction of the family unit structure all who the public is expected to support!
Then throw in an irresponsible Government who subsidizes debt as the answer? Which will effect their children and grand children!
So, Charles Who represents the average people who want to play by the rules, be responsible, work hard, pay their own way and their taxes?
They want to know?
Those without health care will die. I work hard, I am responsible, and I have always paid my own way AND my taxes....but today....I do need healthcare...And the only option I have is more expensive than I can afford. And no, I don't have a boat, or a big screen, I have only the necessities of life. Charles is right.....
ReplyDeleteThose without health care will die. I work hard, I am responsible, and I have always paid my own way AND my taxes....but today....I do need healthcare...And the only option I have is more expensive than I can afford. And no, I don't have a boat, or a big screen, I have only the necessities of life. Charles is right.....
ReplyDeleteAugust 7, 2009 5:32 AM
---------------------
Then WHY? In a country that was built on hard work and and the ideas of Fair Rules and Values. ISN"T their any other affordable alternatives
through competition?
You can't mandate your way to a return to the values that built a responsible society and let its people and leaders do what they want irresponibly!
The polls say that 59% of Americans disagree with passing healthcare reform if it is a democrat only plan. And Obama says "get out of our way and we will fix it ourselves". He still wants to play the blame game instead of stepping up and reaching across the aisle and finding a compromise.
ReplyDeleteI am saying emphatically that I do not care about the polls, political parties or partisanship. I am saying emphatically that families in health crisis need help.
ReplyDeleteEarlier this week, we read of how the public school employees will get a pay increase that will be totally consumed by an even larger increase in their costs health insurance.
Now if you awaken from media hypnosis, you will also find that insurance carriers, or in some cases employers, trends have been to reduce the scope of medical care one can get. Even though data shows that preventive care can cut costs of medical treatment by nearly one third, there is a constant struggle to get or keep preventive care coverage.
Mammograms, prostate checks, pap smears etc are all bargaining chips that people have to fight to get or keep. The cost of one of those procedures is neglible versus the cost of treating the illness that might have been detected at a nuisance stage.
Healthcare has not been a health or humanitarian issue to date. It has been decided through cost/benefit analysis. Employers and insurers have statistically calculated that most of these diseases occur at or near the end of a person's working career and therefore, deferring attention passes the cost on to government (medicare) anyway. It does not impact the profitability of the employer in a statistical model.
Also, if you employ 1000 people and only 3 encounter a major illness earlier during their working lifespan, one argues that the 997 will be content to have a few dollars extra. Good model unless you are one of the 3 who really needed the coverage.
If you carried that out, that's 30 out of 10,000. Which is about the pace we are on here in Arkansas City for neighbors and friends who wind up with a life threatening disease and no insurance to defer the costs AND no resources offering treatment. There are metro areas where a million or more people live and live this nightmare also.
Us working class people don't need more taxes but, (from a person who will never be a billionaire) how many billions does one really need to live in this world?
Charles,
ReplyDeleteThe reason you don't have affordable healthcare now is because we already have a form of Socialized health care! We have it in the VA, Medicare, Medicaid in the State trhough SRS and through the mandate to the hospitals that ER must treat Patients.
I visited a relative in a rest home who was recovering from surgery. One of the nurses was a relative of a local Doctor. So I asked why they didn't become a doctor?
Their answer was - they didn't want to go through what doctors had to endure.
Also, the relative was paying out of pocket for the recovery at $3,000/mo.
The nurse said they really consisdered themselves as working for the State and not my relative!
Through Social programs the healthcare system has become so regulated by the various levels of Government that it is really a stealth form of tax and a redistribution of wealth.
What happened to Healthcare as a viable business through competition?
ISN"T their any other affordable alternatives
ReplyDeletethrough competition?
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The problem is any and all health care entities charge way more than they should for health care. Some hospitals charge one price for those with health care insurance and one price for those who don't. How can that be? Because they are making huge profits on those who do have health insurance. Which in turn the insurance company charges way more than they should for rates. Which in turn they charge your employer more than they should for covering you. And you end up paying more than you should for health insurance. Mean while, profits are up, the health care industry is booming, and many people are going broke or dying because they don't have health care.
If there was a state or federal health care system, at least there would be an affordable choice of who could be your carrier. If the federal or state run health care system was affordable, then many would be able to have insurance that couldn't before. If big insurance wants to be competitive they can drop rates to a more competitive plan and stay in the competition. Granted they may not make the BILLIONS and BILLIONS they make now but the health care system would be not out of control.....or out of touch for millons of Americans....
ISN"T their any other affordable alternatives
ReplyDeletethrough competition?
-------------------
You still didn't answer the question!
Why is there no other competition that makes them be competitive on PRICE!
The hospitals spend a lot of money just to be able to accept insurance. Filing claims, keeping records, the administration costs are ridiculous! I can see why they have to charge the insurance companies more just to break even. Frankly, I appreciate getting a discount for paying cash. At least it proves they are willing to do what they can. I also agree that the insurance companies are making a fortune, which I have no problem with. Business is business. But I am sure that there is a way to reduce costs by making less paperwork, and less administration. But it will happen only if they want it to.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I can tell they are all in it together....could it be price fixing? Money talks....BS walks..... Who the heck knows? It is broken and needs to be fixed! At least a new health care plan would be a step in the right direction. IMO
ReplyDeletePrez BO was the greatest community organizer on earth. Now other citizens are organizing & that's a problem. Sounds like the usual double standard.
ReplyDeletePrez BO is at least addressing issues instead of ignoring them or "just doing nothing" like we had in the last 8 years. Organize away.....lol
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteCharles, The reason you don't have affordable healthcare now is because we already have a form of Socialized health care! August 7, 2009 8:28 AM
I am certain this comment was offered in an editorial sense. (meaning US and not me personally). The conflict that I have is that I really do have affordable and fairly decent coverage. My costs are influenced by health care providers (physicians and hospitals) who must try to recover some of their loss through increased costs to me, my employer and the insurance premiums.
You see, doing nothing even costs us. Thank goodness the humanitarian code requires us to at least seek to save a life through health care. Now for some that means, amputation of a limb simply because it is less costly than trying to treat an ailment and rehab the patient.
For some that means comfort treatment rather than transplant. For some that means addictive meds that cover the pain rather than surgery or therapy to cure the condition.
In each of those cases, we likely remove someone from the candidate pool of employable folks and sentence them public assistance. That costs us.
For others, their inability to pay their bills adds to the cost of hospital operations, doctor office visit fees. That costs us.
Finally, because we then see that loss distributed across the entire spectrum from the doctor office to the medical facility to the insurance carriers and employers, that costs us.
We may not pay it through federal taxes. We will pay it through the price of a gallon of gasoline. We will pay it through the price of a loaf of bread or canned goods at your local grocer. We will pay it through the price of a new automobile at the dealership. We even pay for it per unit of water from your municipality or electricity from the service provider.
We will pay regardless of whether something is done or nothing is done. The only difference is the some who might be left alone in a county owned hospital ward until they take their last breath versus being given available treatments and medications to recover and return to productivity.
Living really has one cost. It is more a matter of an economy that strategically shifts those costs to the less influential within that society and away from the more influential. This is the foundation of economic strata.
I am not talking forms of government or economy. I am simply saying in the purest humanitarian sense, if the super rich believe that a family of four and half people (2adults and 2.5 children per home) can live respectably off $30K/yr, why then does anyone NEED a salary of $10mm -$100mm per yr?
A human life costs the same to live and to save. This discussion is about the distribution of that costs and the sub-topic is health-care.
Good post Aug 7 12:01!!!
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts exactly. Charles has a way of putting into words that can make one think. People sometimes forget the human factor when various topics are being discussed.
ReplyDeleteI once heard a older gentleman say:
ReplyDeleteWhere there is a PROFIT there will be competition. The LARGER the PROFIT the more fierce the COMPETITION!
The only place that doesn't work in a FREE MARKET SOCIETY through CAPITALISM.
IS WHERE THE COMPETITION IS REGULATED OR CONTROLLED BY THE GOVERNMENT!
BUT IN DEFENSE OF REGULATION IT DOES REDUCE THE SUCCESS AND FAILURE RATE WITHIN AN INDUSTRY FOR BUSINESSES THAT PROVIDE A CRITICAL SERVICE AND SEEK TO MAINTAIN ACCEPTABLE STANDARDS!
The rich could give ALL their money away and it still wouldn't change the situation!
The answer lies in providing people with a way to access their own resources and options then help them make quality decisions!
When there were no regulations, factories worked children 12 hours a day 7 days a week.
ReplyDeleteWhen they died they were just tossed aside and another one tossed in.
When there was no regulation, slaves were imported.
I agree with competition, but with greed and human nature being what it is, there has to be some regulation.
There should be a balance between the two ... free trade and restraint on the excesses.
9:37
ReplyDeleteWas this older gentleman YELLING AT YOU????
Charles,
ReplyDeleteIn reading about the new healthcare plan I see where there is something about the government having access to bank accounts for electroninic transactions. Does this mean that the government will have access to everyones bank accounts as they please? I have done some reading on this but am having a hard time deciding just what they mean in this bill. With all of the propaganda that is going on I am having a hard time finding the truth. Anyone else have informed information?
Here is a quote from Obama's weekly speech.
ReplyDeleteRight now, we have a system that works well for the insurance industry, but that doesn’t always work well for you. What we need, and what we will have when we pass health insurance reform, are consumer protections to make sure that those who have insurance are treated fairly and that insurance companies are held accountable.
I understand that Obama is striving to get us better health care as a whole in our country, but in looking at the specifics I am trying to understand "exactly" what this bill is about. In some internet research I am finding there are those who are saying that on "Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access to your banks accounts for electronic funds transfer". I went to the government site PDF bill and read this part of the bill and was unsure if it meant as this person portray's. I would love to have input from others for dicussion. How can we have a discussion about what is right or wrong about it if no one has actually read it and discussed it?
ReplyDeleteUhmmm.. probably because no one has that much time to read the whole thing?
ReplyDelete