Do You Think Barack Obama Represents â??Changeâ?�?

[Psycho4Bud]

So eventually who pays for this? With gas floating around the $4.00/gal. mark the last thing people need is an additional tax. This is a grand idea for those with fat bank accounts but unfortunately that doesn't describe the majority of U.S. citizens.

Universal health care is a broad concept that has been implemented in several ways. The common denominator for all such programs is some form of government action aimed at extending access to health care as widely as possible. Most countries implement universal health care through legislation, regulation and taxation. Legislation and regulation direct what care must be provided, to whom, and on what basis. Usually some costs are borne by the patient but are subsidized by taxation and compensated to the patient by the government. Many programs utilize some form of compulsory insurance to accomplish this goal. Other programs are paid for entirely out of tax revenues and provide automatic coverage for every citizen or resident
Universal health care - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

My next issue with this is this: Why would we have somebody from a failed company, in this case the U.S. government, step in to fix another failed company, the health care industy? Washington is known for red tape, confusion, lack of results. MANY a time does a person that files for disability benifits have to get a lawyer.

Next, the hospital system is broke down internally. Hospital beds that "should" cost under $5,000 sell for $8,000 - $24,000. Surgical tables that "should" sell for $20,000 go for $75,000. Hell, a receptionist chair that sells at Grainger for under $100 goes for $450 because it's considered "Hospital Grade".

Hospitals "claim" to be non-profit.....what a joke! At the end of the fiscal year if they have an additional $5,000,000 in the kitty that just means that they have to friviously waste the money on overpriced chairs, desks, carpeting, window shades, etc...

FIRST off, the entire hospital system should undergo an investigation into waste and price gouging by their vendors. The savings in that alone to the basic consumer would be tremendous! Next in line would be the insurance industry...I'm sure there is waste in that system along with unfair practices. But to have one broken system try to fix another by stepping in on mandates, etc....I just can't see it myself.

Back to the thread topic.....with his link to the Chicago Health care industy he should be well aware of these issues. Seems that some things just can't "change".

Have a good one!:s4:

[daihashi]

The Problem

Millions of Americans are uninsured or underinsured because of rising medical costs: 47 million Americans â?? including nearly 9 million children â?? lack health insurance with no signs of this trend slowing down.
Health care costs are skyrocketing: Health insurance premiums have risen 4 times faster than wages over the past 6 years.
Too little is spent on prevention and public health: The nation faces epidemics of obesity and chronic diseases as well as new threats of pandemic flu and bioterrorism. Yet despite all of this less than 4 cents of every health care dollar is spent on prevention and public health.
Barack Obama's Plan

Quality, Affordable and Portable Coverage for All

• Obama's Plan to Cover Uninsured Americans: Obama will make available a new national health plan to all Americans, including the self-employed and small businesses, to buy affordable health coverage that is similar to the plan available to members of Congress. The Obama plan will have the following features:
  1. Guaranteed eligibility. No American will be turned away from any insurance plan because of illness or pre-existing conditions.
  2. Comprehensive benefits. The benefit package will be similar to that offered through Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), the plan members of Congress have. The plan will cover all essential medical services, including preventive, maternity and mental health care.
  3. Affordable premiums, co-pays and deductibles.
  4. Subsidies. Individuals and families who do not qualify for Medicaid or SCHIP but still need financial assistance will receive an income-related federal subsidy to buy into the new public plan or purchase a private health care plan.
  5. Simplified paperwork and reined in health costs.
  6. Easy enrollment. The new public plan will be simple to enroll in and provide ready access to coverage.
  7. Portability and choice. Participants in the new public plan and the National Health Insurance Exchange (see below) will be able to move from job to job without changing or jeopardizing their health care coverage.
  8. Quality and efficiency. Participating insurance companies in the new public program will be required to report data to ensure that standards for quality, health information technology and administration are being met.
• National Health Insurance Exchange: The Obama plan will create a National Health Insurance Exchange to help individuals who wish to purchase a private insurance plan. The Exchange will act as a watchdog group and help reform the private insurance market by creating rules and standards for participating insurance plans to ensure fairness and to make individual coverage more affordable and accessible. Insurers would have to issue every applicant a policy, and charge fair and stable premiums that will not depend upon health status. The Exchange will require that all the plans offered are at least as generous as the new public plan and have the same standards for quality and efficiency. The Exchange would evaluate plans and make the differences among the plans, including cost of services, public.
• Employer Contribution: Employers that do not offer or make a meaningful contribution to the cost of quality health coverage for their employees will be required to contribute a percentage of payroll toward the costs of the national plan. Small employers that meet certain revenue thresholds will be exempt.
• Mandatory Coverage of Children: Obama will require that all children have health care coverage. Obama will expand the number of options for young adults to get coverage, including allowing young people up to age 25 to continue coverage through their parents' plans.
• Expansion Of Medicaid and SCHIP: Obama will expand eligibility for the Medicaid and SCHIP programs and ensure that these programs continue to serve their critical safety net function.
• Flexibility for State Plans: Due to federal inaction, some states have taken the lead in health care reform. The Obama plan builds on these efforts and does not replace what states are doing. States can continue to experiment, provided they meet the minimum standards of the national plan.

Lower Costs by Modernizing The U.S. Health Care System

• Reducing Costs of Catastrophic Illnesses for Employers and Their Employees: Catastrophic health expenditures account for a high percentage of medical expenses for private insurers. The Obama plan would reimburse employer health plans for a portion of the catastrophic costs they incur above a threshold if they guarantee such savings are used to reduce the cost of workers' premiums.
• Helping Patients:
  1. Support disease management programs. Seventy five percent of total health care dollars are spent on patients with one or more chronic conditions, such as diabetes, heart disease and high blood pressure. Obama will require that providers that participate in the new public plan, Medicare or the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) utilize proven disease management programs. This will improve quality of care, give doctors better information and lower costs.
  2. Coordinate and integrate care. Over 133 million Americans have at least one chronic disease and these chronic conditions cost a staggering $1.7 trillion yearly. Obama will support implementation of programs and encourage team care that will improve coordination and integration of care of those with chronic conditions.
  3. Require full transparency about quality and costs. Obama will require hospitals and providers to collect and publicly report measures of health care costs and quality, including data on preventable medical errors, nurse staffing ratios, hospital-acquired infections, and disparities in care. Health plans will also be required to disclose the percentage of premiums that go to patient care as opposed to administrative costs.
• Ensuring Providers Deliver Quality Care:
  1. Promote patient safety. Obama will require providers to report preventable medical errors and support hospital and physician practice improvement to prevent future occurrences.
  2. Align incentives for excellence. Both public and private insurers tend to pay providers based on the volume of services provided, rather than the quality or effectiveness of care. Providers who see patients enrolled in the new public plan, the National Health Insurance Exchange, Medicare and FEHBP will be rewarded for achieving performance thresholds on outcome measures.
  3. Comparative effectiveness research. Obama will establish an independent institute to guide reviews and research on comparative effectiveness, so that Americans and their doctors will have the accurate and objective information they need to make the best decisions for their health and well-being.
  4. Tackle disparities in health care. Obama will tackle the root causes of health disparities by addressing differences in access to health coverage and promoting prevention and public health, both of which play a major role in addressing disparities. He will also challenge the medical system to eliminate inequities in health care through quality measurement and reporting, implementation of effective interventions such as patient navigation programs, and diversification of the health workforce.
  5. Insurance reform. Obama will strengthen antitrust laws to prevent insurers from overcharging physicians for their malpractice insurance and will promote new models for addressing errors that improve patient safety, strengthen the doctor-patient relationship and reduce the need for malpractice suits.
• Lowering Costs Through Investment in Electronic Health Information Technology Systems: Most medical records are still stored on paper, which makes it hard to coordinate care, measure quality or reduce medical errors and which costs twice as much as electronic claims. Obama will invest $10 billion a year over the next five years to move the U.S. health care system to broad adoption of standards-based electronic health information systems, including electronic health records, and will phase in requirements for full implementation of health IT. Obama will ensure that patients' privacy is protected.
• Lowering Costs by Increasing Competition in the Insurance and Drug Markets: The insurance business today is dominated by a small group of large companies that has been gobbling up their rivals. There have been over 400 health care mergers in the last 10 years, and just two companies dominate a full third of the national market. These changes were supposed to make the industry more efficient, but instead premiums have skyrocketed by over 87 percent.
  1. Barack Obama will prevent companies from abusing their monopoly power through unjustified price increases. His plan will force insurers to pay out a reasonable share of their premiums for patient care instead of keeping exorbitant amounts for profits and administration. His new National Health Exchange will help increase competition by insurers.
  2. Lower prescription drug costs. The second-fastest growing type of health expenses is prescription drugs. Pharmaceutical companies are selling the exact same drugs in Europe and Canada but charging Americans more than double the price. Obama will allow Americans to buy their medicines from other developed countries if the drugs are safe and prices are lower outside the U.S. Obama will also repeal the ban that prevents the government from negotiating with drug companies, which could result in savings as high as $30 billion. Finally, Obama will work to increase the use of generic drugs in Medicare, Medicaid, and FEHBP and prohibit big name drug companies from keeping generics out of markets.

Fight for New Initiatives

• Advance the Biomedical Research Field: As a result of biomedical research the prevention, early detection and treatment of diseases such as cancer and heart disease is better today than any other time in history. Barack Obama has consistently supported funding for the national institutes of health and the national science foundation. Obama strongly supports investments in biomedical research, as well as medical education and training in health-related fields, because it provides the foundation for new therapies and diagnostics. Obama has been a champion of research in cancer, mental health, health disparities, global health, women and children's health, and veterans' health. As president, Obama will strengthen funding for biomedical research, and better improve the efficiency of that research by improving coordination both within government and across government/private/non-profit partnerships. An Obama administration will ensure that we translate scientific progress into improved approaches to disease prevention, early detection and therapy that is available for all Americans.
• Fight AIDS Worldwide. There are 40 million people across the planet infected with HIV/AIDS. As president, Obama will continue to be a global leader in the fight against AIDS. Obama believes in working across party lines to combat this epidemic and recently joined Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) at a large California evangelical church to promote greater investment in the global AIDS battle.
• Support Americans with Disabilities: As a former civil rights lawyer, Barack Obama knows firsthand the importance of strong protections for minority communities in our society. Obama is committed to strengthening and better enforcing the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) so that future generations of Americans with disabilities have equal rights and opportunities. Obama believes we must restore the original legislative intent of the ADA in the wake of court decisions that have restricted the interpretation of this landmark legislation.
  
  Barack Obama is also committed to ensuring that disabled Americans receive Medicaid and Medicare benefits in a low-cost, effective and timely manner. Recognizing that many individuals with disabilities rely on Medicare, Obama worked with Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) to urge the department of health and human services to provide clear and reliable information on the Medicare prescription drug benefit and to ensure that the Medicare recipients were protected from fraudulent claims by marketers and drug plan agents.
• Improve Mental Health Care. Mental illness affects approximately one in five American families. The National Alliance on Mental Illness estimates that untreated mental illnesses cost the U.S. more than $100 billion per year. As president, Obama will support mental health parity so that coverage for serious mental illnesses are provided on the same terms and conditions as other illnesses and diseases.
• Protect Our Children from Lead Poisoning. More than 430,000 American children have dangerously high levels of lead in their blood. Lead can cause irreversible brain damage, learning disabilities, behavioral problems, and, at very high levels, seizures, coma and death. As president, Obama will protect children from lead poisoning by requiring that child care facilities be lead-safe within five years.
• Reduce Risks of Mercury Pollution. More than five million women of childbearing age have high levels of toxic mercury in their blood, and approximately 630,000 newborns are born at risk every year. Barack Obama has a plan to significantly reduce the amount of mercury that is deposited in oceans, lakes, and rivers, which in turn would reduce the amount of mercury in fish.
• Support Americans with Autism. More than one million Americans have autism, a complex neurobiological condition that has a range of impacts on thinking, feeling, language, and the ability to relate to others. As diagnostic criteria broaden and awareness increases, more cases of autism have been recognized across the country. Barack Obama believes that we can do more to help autistic Americans and their families understand and live with autism. He has been a strong supporter of more than $1 billion in federal funding for autism research on the root causes and treatments, and he believes that we should increase funding for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to truly ensure that no child is left behind.
  
  More than anything, autism remains a profound mystery with a broad spectrum of effects on autistic individuals, their families, loved ones, the community, and education and health care systems. Obama believes that the government and our communities should work together to provide a helping hand to autistic individuals and their families.

Barack Obama's Record

• Health Insurance: In 2003, Barack Obama sponsored and passed legislation that expanded health care coverage to 70,000 kids and 84,000 adults. In the U.S. Senate, Obama cosponsored the Healthy Kids Act of 2007 and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) Reauthorization Act of 2007 to ensure that more American children have affordable health care coverage.
• Women's Health: Obama worked to pass a number of laws in Illinois and Washington to improve the health of women. His accomplishments include creating a task force on cervical cancer, providing greater access to breast and cervical cancer screenings, and helping improve prenatal and premature birth services.

I want you to read this and Ill post more tonight I have plenty for you and I like this debate I hope you will continue it with me. I also have some more of Mccains plans as well. I love knowlegde also so keep it comig.:rasta::rastasmoke:imp:

No offense, but you just copy pasted directly from barack obama's website without any backing or explanation of your own.

Barack Obama wants to place I think something in the tune of 3.5% - 4% payroll/income tax to the people... Taxing more of our income while we're already in an economic downturn with inflated oil prices and getting burned at the pumps and really in all markets everywhere. Please keep in mind that some employers don't even offer insurance but yet they are going to get taxed anyway. That is what universal means.. EVERYONE. If a company does not comply with this they will be charging them the cost.

Guess what, the employer is going to roll over that cost onto the people by either charging for it or layoffs.

And the small business that will remain exempt from this will still end up with it's employees not having health care.

Will you be one of the people that's laid off? Or will you simply be one of the people who's losing 4% more of their income along with other tax hikes that he's sure to put in place.

This is a man that says he's fine with the oil price increase. He does not mind it! In a time when our economy is in a downturn and people need more money in their pockets.. he's just going to take it away.

Now then back to your post, which wasn't really a post but more of a copy paste that you could've just done last night. Especially considering it's right there on his website or could be found with a 5 second google search.

I asked you if you knew what.. and How he was going to do it.. and I asked for an explanation of how this is going to impact the American people. You've at least already answered the What, but that question has been touched on slightly from at least 2 other posters. So this information is not something new.

Really what I'm trying to do here is just get people to think. I don't mean this in a rude gesture, more as a friendly American gesture.

Regardless of anyone's political stance I would like to see more Americans simply not fall pray for the media masses that like to lead the people as if they were sheep or cattle.


ps: many of mccains and obama's ideas actually overlap. Did you even notice that? Would you rather lose 3-5% of your income or would you rather the government just give you the money that's needed for insurance and put the power IN YOUR hands.

This is just another example about how the democrats generally want to take away our right to choose.

pss: Obama is not exactly poor. He and his wife had a combined *reported* income of $984k in 2006... he received a book advance for 1.9 million dollars and In 2005, shortly after Obama had been elected to the Senate, his wife recieved a pay raise increase taking her from $121,910 in 2004 to $316,962 in 2005. Keep in mind that this is shortly after Obama was elected into office. Coincidence, maybe.. but the timing is too close for it to just be coincidence. In addition to this it is interesting to note that both Barack Obama and his Wife hold major disdain towards the health care system but still have no problems participating in the abuse.

Why not turn the pay raise down?

Obama is not as poor as you'd like to believe.

These were only reported incomes. Who knows what he's getting on the side.

Don't fall into the hype!

[daihashi]

Back to the thread topic.....with his link to the Chicago Health care industy he should be well aware of these issues. Seems that some things just can't "change".

Have a good one!:s4:

GET OUT OF MY HEAD p4B!!! lol

:thumbsup:

[daihashi]

Also.. I'd like to note that an estimated 47 million Americans do not have insurance...


Our population is about 300-304million people.

You're suggesting to punish the many for the few. 15% of Americans are uninsured, an estimated 70% of Americans have private health insurance.. and a remaining 10% - 15% are unknown.

Honestly... McCain's plan makes more sense than what Obama suggests.

[BigWeed]

Also.. I'd like to note that an estimated 47 million Americans do not have insurance...


Our population is about 300-304million people.

You're suggesting to punish the many for the few. 15% of Americans are uninsured, an estimated 70% of Americans have private health insurance.. and a remaining 10% - 15% are unknown.

Honestly... McCain's plan makes more sense than what Obama suggests.

I have been reading both plans for the past 2 hours and I agree with you they both mirror each others. Mccains dont tell how he pays for it and Obamas dont tell but offers more. Mccain wants to take away some of the tax credit that normally goes to the employers and put it in my pocket to pay for what ever health care plan I want. The problem with that is the companys hes taking away the credit from is going to charge me even more for the goods that I buy. So he cant pay for his plan because those companys will get back in the end.


Obamas plan is offering more and he plans to raise the taxes on the wealthest americans and corparations which I like. I am a reasonable man no matter what each ones plans our Ill still be holding the short end of the stick. They are both going at it the wrong way and it seems that there should be more regulations on the Insurance companys and I agree with Pyscho there should be more regulations on hospitals also I know I been in one for 4 months. So I will concede this to you Daihashi and go and get my gun and bible and pray that I dont have my premiums go up anymore so i dont have to go postal on them. I think we need a post for everybody to have to chime in on what whould you do if you where president to help BigWeed with his health care.:rasta::rastasmoke:imp:

[daihashi]

I have been reading both plans for the past 2 hours and I agree with you they both mirror each others. Mccains dont tell how he pays for it and Obamas dont tell but offers more. Mccain wants to take away some of the tax credit that normally goes to the employers and put it in my pocket to pay for what ever health care plan I want. The problem with that is the companys hes taking away the credit from is going to charge me even more for the goods that I buy. So he cant pay for his plan because those companys will get back in the end.

Why would they charge you more? It's a redistribution of money. They would not be taxed as proposed under Obama's plan. He's simply moving the credit that normally goes to employers and putting it in your hands. You say he didn't propose how he was going to make this happen, but if you're redistributing money there's not much to explain. Take from column A and put in column B. That's the basic gist of it. Pretty simple. I don't necessarily like McCain's plan just so you know; I simply feel it makes more sense than Obama's plan.

Obamas plan is offering more and he plans to raise the taxes on the wealthest americans and corparations which I like. I am a reasonable man no matter what each ones plans our Ill still be holding the short end of the stick.

Honestly Obama's plan truely does offer more and I don't think I could ever argue against this. What I can argue is the impact this plan will have on the American people.

The super rich make up 0.7 of the population, and I'm going to make up a number here for the rich, a generous number I feel (meaning I'm probably overestimating)... we'll say 10% of the population are the rich. So now we have 10.7% of the population trying to support 89.3% of the rest of the US. Keep in mind that the majority of the members of Congress and most high US officials also fall into this 10.7%. Assuming that Congress for once decided to do what's best for the people and not what's best for themselves. The tax rate on this 10.7% would have to be signifigant in order to aid in support of the remaining 270 million (current population is about 304million, I subtracted 10%), we'll say they're getting 15% tax increase (another estimated number.. not fact). Let's factor in the corporations whom hadn't been previously taxed. They are going to want to protect their profits. Layoffs are the easiest way to reduce cost in order to keep profits up. Through Layoffs the corporations free up the cost it would take to pay that person, in addition they will not be penalized in taxes for that 1 person since they are no longer with the company.

Anyway you slice it or dice it it's a win/win situation for the corporations. Directly leading to an increase in Job unemployment. At this point you're exchanging one problem for another. This also directly effects the economy. If people don't have money to spend then they can't buy goods, which means companies don't make money.. and I think you can see how this cycle would just keep repeating itself in a downward spiral.

They are both going at it the wrong way and it seems that there should be more regulations on the Insurance companys and I agree with Pyscho there should be more regulations on hospitals also I know I been in one for 4 months. So I will concede this to you Daihashi and go and get my gun and bible and pray that I dont have my premiums go up anymore so i dont have to go postal on them. I think we need a post for everybody to have to chime in on what whould you do if you where president to help BigWeed with his health care.:rasta::rastasmoke:imp:

YES!!! They are both going about it the wrong way. I never said I particularly cared for McCain's plan; however when comparing them side by side (because let's be honest... these two turd muffins are the only two we really have to pick from... what's Bob Barr going to do :wtf I felt McCain's made more sense for the American people, but just so you know I agree. They are both going about it the wrong way!

I agree about regulation but the problem with regulation is that you end up giving the government more and more control. Meaning if they force the hospitals to reduce costs that means there is going to have to be some special treatment to hospitals from outside organizations: Water companies, Electrical companies, Vendor services, Insurance costs (for doctors and Hospitals.. not for individuals), miscellaneous hospital stock (ie: scrubs, needles, little paper cups), and the list goes on and on. If the situation got bad enough you end up with the government controlling everything. Because you can't regulate one thing without, at some point, having to regulate something else in the future.

While I agree something needs to be done to regulate the hospitals at the same time I'm wary of giving the government any more power over me (yes this does directly effect us, it's similar to the downward spiral I spoke about earlier. I can explain if you request it but for now I'll assume you can see the outcome for yourself).

There's another type of government where they are allowed to regulate and control everything. It's called Communism. While I don't think it'll ever get that extreme; I'm not particularly keen about giving away my freedoms.

Under Obama's plan I don't see it working unless he is able to regulate multiple industries. Because even with taxing the 10.7% of the rich and the corporations.. I don't feel it's going to be enough to provide 304 million Americans with healthcare unless he forces regulation across multiple industries.

Being unemployed in a poor job market with an economy spiraling downward because of a lack of money is not something I look forward to. This is a situation that is created when you tax corporations and try to force regulation on various industries. The middle class is still going to be the one who suffers?

I hope I was able to make my view/stance on this clear.

For the most part you and I are on the same team; we just have different view points on how things will effect us.

[daihashi]

Also.. I'd like to note that an estimated 47 million Americans do not have insurance...


Our population is about 300-304million people.

You're suggesting to punish the many for the few. 15% of Americans are uninsured, an estimated 70% of Americans have private health insurance.. and a remaining 10% - 15% are unknown.

Honestly... McCain's plan makes more sense than what Obama suggests.

I'd like to note I misread the figure.. the estimated amount of americans that have private health insurance is 59% down 11% from 1987.

However in contrast in 1987 the uninsured were at 15.6% and are now at 20.2%. A rise of less 6% in over 20 years.

To me this would indicate a problem that needs to be addressed right away; but not the socialization of America's Healthcare.

Regulation I agree with; the problem is that it's a scary animal and it is really easy for the government to get carried away. In this day and age of corrupt politicians everywhere who are among the rich... I'm a bit uncomfortable. Do I sacrifice my wallet or my freedoms?

[Dave Byrd]

I'm not patient enough to get in here like my wife or Dragonrider would and argue point for point. I don't make a policy of arguing with folks who're not ever going to see things differently, and that's what a couple of you here are. Which is fine. Fortunately there is a huge country out here who've had enough experience with our current health care and insurance system to see things differently. Enough to elect a new party this year and let someone else steer for a while. I'm sure of it.

--Aside to Daihashi: Thank you for correcting your insured/uninsured facts up there. I appreciate your getting that straightened out. You throw out a lot of words and sectioned-out debate comments, but I have in at least two places noticed that it has been smokescreen talk. I suspect there are many more but that's just a hunch for now and I'm too lazy to prove it. One smokey place was in your authoritative discussion of insurance coverages up above here and in the McCain thread. The other was where you were throwing out made-up tax percentages as examples of how a Democratic tax plan couldn't work. That's all those were was fabricated percentages. I haven't found my way back to that one but I will in time. Till I do, do some reading of Hillary's health care plan, which has more detail and is probably a form of what we'll end up with after Obama works up a public plan. Have you ever heard of the Tax Policy Center and the Tax Policy Institute? You'll find real facts in those. I know you're going to want to argue back on this section and this whole post, Daihashi. But I'm not going to be debating this until you've earned a medical degree and practiced medicine for 25 years yourself. -- (end of aside)

Now back to the general argument. Till everyone here begins to have some experience of paying huge health bills or watching others at close range do so, I'm not sure the anti-Obama-healthcare arguers can ever feel differently than you do now. Every day, there are fewer and fewer Americans who can afford medical care or who are going bankrupt because they've had to get it without insurance or with insufficient coverage. They can no longer get procedures that'll save their lives, surgeries, or hospital stays or diagnostic testing that would. It's not because doctors' fees are going up, either. It's because big insurance and big hospital companies, in addition to big pharmaceutical companies, completely drive health policy in this country in a way that will drive value for their stockholders. They're raising the prices for care exorbitantly. Not doing anything to save lives. They're only saving dollars.

There's the true essence of this argument. Letting doctors and patients be able to provide/receive health care that's needed (Obama's leanings) versus bottom line big business control of that health care, which is how McCain would keep things. Every day more doctors leave their jobs for new ones or enter new lines of business because they're no longer able to support their offices and families with insurance apportioning health care the way it does. That's nuts, especially as hard we've had to work to get to where we are.

I believe we'll end up with a combination public-private health care system once this is ironed out. There'll still be employer-provided insurance for some--the upper echelon like have it now. (Just below the echelon of people who are so rich they can pay for whatever they need out of pocket.) Then there'll also be public portable tax-subsidized plan. I don't think we'll ever get to single payor health care. Perhaps I'm wrong, though.

If you're part of the we-can't-afford national health care team, you need to open your eyes a lot wider. Hell, we can't afford not to and if you think for one second that we're not already paying for it, then pull your heads out. You are. With those increased hospital costs to make up for all the unpaid and unpayable bills. With increased premiums and copayments. With our tax dollars that go to the VA and Medicare and Medicaid now, particularly to Medicaid to cover the poorest of the poor. We're covering the employed and the medically poor with our own insurance dollars and upward-spiraling fees. We're paying out the wazoo now, about 15% more each year, and it'll only continue to go up till the country crashes in this area, too.

So we can either pay for it up front, implementing cost controls, reasonable fees, and providing health care, including preventative care, to people before they're in such desperate straights that their unpaid bills just add to our tax and expense burden. Or we can continue to do it the way we're doing it now, reactively and after disastrous health circumstances have struck. That isn't working and is only making care for all of us less obtainable and more expensive. Only the rich are getting richer, and increasingly that's the only group that'll be able to obtain health care.

Will it be a hassle and an imperfect solution? Of course it will. Nothing is perfect. But it'll be better than what we have now. The Republican plan only looks at the short term, as they do with the proposed tax cuts on capital gains, proposed corporate tax cuts, too. It's true that those cuts and corporate cuts would act as a stimulus in the short term. But that's as far as it goes. Long-term, just like we're all going to have to face higher taxes long term no matter what, is a whole different ball game. We're already killing our selves with the buy-now, pay-later war. We might as well pay up front for the battle that's killing people domestically, which is our health crisis and head off the yet another deficit crisis by facing the truth now.

[daihashi]

--Aside to Daihashi: Thank you for correcting your insured/uninsured facts up there. I appreciate your getting that straightened out. You throw out a lot of words and sectioned-out debate comments, but I have in at least two places noticed that it has been smokescreen talk. I suspect there are many more but that's just a hunch for now and I'm too lazy to prove it. One smokey place was in your authoritative discussion of insurance coverages up above here and in the McCain thread. The other was where you were throwing out made-up tax percentages as examples of how a Democratic tax plan couldn't work. That's all those were was fabricated percentages. I haven't found my way back to that one but I will in time. Till I do, do some reading of Hillary's health care plan, which has more detail and is probably a form of what we'll end up with after Obama works up a public plan. Have you ever heard of the Tax Policy Center and the Tax Policy Institute? You'll find real facts in those. I know you're going to want to argue back on this section and this whole post, Daihashi. But I'm not going to be debating this until you've earned a medical degree and practiced medicine for 25 years yourself. -- (end of aside)

Edited:


You know what.. no comment. The statements I previously made before editing are not for public eyes to see and will be addressed elsewhere.

Good day sir :thumbsup:

[thcbongman]

[quote=painretreat]

ARLINGTON, Va., June 12 /Standard Newswire/ -- Today, on the fourth day of Barack Obama's "Change That Works For You" tour, McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds issued the following statement:

"Barack Obama's assertion that the only problem with higher gas prices is that they've gone up too fast -- saying he'd prefer a 'gradual' increase instead -- shows how clearly out of touch he is with Americans struggling with record gas prices. At a time when Americans need relief at the pump, Barack Obama's support for higher gas prices and higher energy taxes is just another example of his weak economic judgment."

This Week In An Interview With CNBC, Barack Obama Said He Would Have Preferred If Higher Gasoline Prices Happened More Gradually:

THANKS for all the good info. With all the reading, I've yet to do, it will help me make up my mind! I always like to know the facts. Don't know how U do it, but I appreciate all this! My initial gutt feeling is--there will be no change, until I read all the attached data. You brought up a lot of points I did not hear in the senate hearing, but did not hear it all! He did state that forcing oil co. to lower price in ILL. did not filter to consumer

Now, I have some homework! :thumbsup:
Oh, is that Harwood guy the one that dropped dead today or was it the MSNBC guy, from Hard Copy! man i liked that dude's political questions!

I simply do not understand what's wrong with a gradual increase, using this to attack Obama when he's trying to see the bigger picture. Gas prices will continue to rise, it's better to have a constant increase than the fluctuations we are seeing. In the last 3 months, this aren't gradual increases, they're substancial.

McCain's proposal to temporarily lower the gas-taxes sounds good by slogan, but not by application which to me signifies the lack of understanding with the current energy crisis. All that would do is increase demand and enable oil companies to sneek in more profits. McCain is from the old school of thinking, before the era of a complicated market of securities which vastly has a huge effect on oil prices. Check this article out:

Investors' Growing Appetite for Oil Evades Market Limits - washingtonpost.com

McCain also stated back in 2003 that Ethanol "does nothing to reduce fuel consumption." Of course he changed this stance later on, but it's indicative of he's less inclined to support more production and standardization of alternative fuels.