(Lake Martin Specific)
111,199 messages
Updated 7/2/2024 1:13:20 AM
Lakes Online Forum
83,714 messages
Updated 6/29/2024 8:26:11 AM
Lakes Online Forum
5,198 messages
Updated 6/19/2024 3:45:44 AM
(Lake Martin Specific)
4,171 messages
Updated 5/29/2024 10:51:34 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,171 messages
Updated 6/27/2024 7:05:46 AM
Lakes Online Forum
4,261 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,979 messages
Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM
(Lake Martin Specific)
169 messages
Updated 5/31/2023 1:39:35 PM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
Health Care Warning-Stimulus
|
|
Date:
|
2/9/2009 2:34:11 PM
|
Folks:
You need to look at the overview in National Review regarding the establishment of a health care commission and forcing doctors to submit your health records to the Feds under penalty of fines. The commission also has the power to make health care decisions in light of a cost-benefit analysis. Seniors will get the worst of this because it determines the approval of a procedure based on the extension of their life. Older folks will be denied treatment simply because they are old.
The more I learn about this bill the more I realize how bad things are going to get. By the way, with the defection of the three RINO's it is all but assured to pass in some form or fashion. And when it doesn't work they will use that as an excuse for passing another, more intrusive round of spending and increased government control and when that doesn't work.......
Hearing the idiots in Elkhart, IN calling on the Messiah to put them back to work tells me just how far we are gone. This is eerily reminiscent of the New Deal which also did not work.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
50 De-Stimulus Facts
|
|
Date:
|
2/9/2009 3:43:55 PM
|
Read it weep.
URL: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjcyODIyZGM2MGU1ZDdkNDgxZDc3OTNjYjM4ZDY1ODI=
|
| Name: |
au67
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Health Care Warning-Stimulus
|
|
Date:
|
2/9/2009 3:47:37 PM
|
The RV industry in Elkhart is being put out of business by the Democrat party by their "death to the gas guzzlers mantra" and yet Barack Obama is there telling them only he and government can save them.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
50 De-Stimulus Facts
|
|
Date:
|
2/9/2009 3:56:37 PM
|
What I don't understand ... if Obama really wanted a bipartisian package to show a unified america ... why not take all the pieces that both parties agree on .... which there are many and put this in a single bill for quick passage. It may only come to $200 billion rather than $900 billion, but it would be supported by all. Then congress can take all the time they need to fight over the other $700 billion and if all this other crap is necessary to stimulate the economy. If not they can change the name to the democrat socialist conversion bill and pass it without any republicans.
Then the true stimulus will pass with full support.
I know the answer why they will not do this .... buecause this is the way the democrats will try to pull the wool over the american peoples eyes to get these socialist programs passed by saying it is economic stimulus and then bash republicans saying they do not want to stimulate the economy.
Yeah, we no longer are going to have politics as usual. This is a new day.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Some details
|
|
Date:
|
2/9/2009 4:40:53 PM
|
On page 151 of this legislative pork-fest [the 'stimulus' bill] is one of the clandestine nuggets of social policy manipulation that are peppered throughout the bill. Section 9201 of the stimulus package establishes the 'Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research.' This body, which would be made up of federal bureaucrats will 'coordinate the conduct or support of comparative effectiveness and related health services research.' Sounds benign enough, but the man behind the Coordinating Council, Health and Human Services Secretary-designate [since withdrawn] (and tax cheat) Tom Daschle, was kind enough to explain the goal of this organization. It is to cut health care costs by preventing Americans from getting treatments that the government decides don't meet their standards for cost effectiveness. In his 2008 book on health care, he explained that such a council would, 'lower overall spending by determining which medicines, treatments and procedures are most effective-and identifying those that do not justify their high price tags.' Once a panel of government experts decides what is and what is not cost-effective by their definition, the government will stop paying for treatments, medicines, therapies or devices that fall into the latter category. ... Mind you, they are not simply looking to exclude treatments that don't work, but to exclude treatments that are effective, but whose cost, in their opinion, does not justify their use. You, the patient, and your physician don't get a vote. This would make the federal government the single most important decision-maker regarding health care for every patient in America." --public affairs consultant Douglas O'Brien
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Health Care Warning-Stimulus
|
|
Date:
|
2/9/2009 7:32:15 PM
|
It's an interesting article. In fairness though, you should point out that the National Review is an ultra-conservative magazine, so it's not likely they are going to think highly of any bill that doesn't conform to their ultra conservative thinking.
After watching scores of economists, and assorted other experts on a variety of news shows this week, plus reading a lot about it, I've come to the conclusion that it contains some components that are not likely to stimulate the economy; however they are a small part of the overall bill. The question that the experts can't seem to agree on is whether the legitimate simulus items will do enough, soon enough. I see that 4 Republicans in the Senate decided to get serious about it and there are tax cuts in the bill, presumably for business. I have to say that I'm a little disappointed the the Republicans did not fight harder for inclusion of more of their ideas. It appears to me that the majority of them just folded arms and took the political route. So my hat is off to those that got in there and hammered out what they could.
I watched the President's town hall meeting today in Elkhart and I didn't come away from it feeling much of anything. It was designed to make people feel better -- it was hard to tell by the audience whether they did or not.
WW - I have to say I thought the same thing as you did -- why didn't they just incorporate both sides in the same bill. I guess it's because at the end of the day, politicians are politicians.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
PS on Health Care
|
|
Date:
|
2/9/2009 7:42:08 PM
|
Okay, so instead of having health insurance executives deciding what treatment is "cost effective", now we'll have the government doing that. What has really changed?
I wonder if some of the idea behind Dashle's plan was to bring the big drug companies and their huge lobby under control.
I haven't believed in a long time that my Dr. or I were part of the process of "approved treatment" or "customary or usual charges" decisions. And let's face it, if you don't have insurance you are screwed if you get sick.
With regard to Senior Citizens -- well, I look at my aunt. The woman is 83 and a hypochondriac. A lot of the elderly see going to the Dr. as a legitimate social activity. And I have a suspicion that there are a large number of Drs. who are willing to aid and abet them, and then bill the h*ll out of the Medicare.
Having said all this, I do not want to end up with socialized medicine. I saw a real horror story when one of my close friend's twin sister was diagnosed with a rare and deadly cancer.
|
| Name: |
Swimmer27
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You must watch MSNBNC
|
|
Date:
|
2/10/2009 7:52:41 AM
|
Hound Says:
"After watching scores of economists, and assorted other experts on a variety of news shows this week, plus reading a lot about it, I've come to the conclusion that it contains some components that are not likely to stimulate the economy; however they are a small part of the overall bill."
Only Chris Mathews and his tingnly legs could convince anyone of the statement above.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You must watch MSNBNC
|
|
Date:
|
2/10/2009 8:45:45 AM
|
I do watch MSNBC, but I also watch Fox News and CNN, and I read quite a bit.
Every morning I watch Morning Joe. He is a former Republican Congressman and a fiscal conservative.
All of the shows having various economists and other experts from both sides of the economic spectrum.
I really don't watch Chris Matthews.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
PS on Health Care
|
|
Date:
|
2/10/2009 8:59:12 AM
|
Here's the BIG difference. Yes, insurers, particularly HMO's have mechanisms to get involved in decision making. But remember, as a consumer you always have access to the court system if they do something egregious. Also, if there are numerous complaints at least the company has the ability to change carriers (which we have done several times because of problems) and for most there are options for different coverage that are non-HMO. With the government you get NONE of those protections and there is no one they are accountable to. Just ask the British who if you are suffering from macular degeneration you have to go blind in one eye before they will pay for the treatment in the other eye and that's a fact! If we are dumb enough to accept this from our government we deserve the same misery.
|
| Name: |
NCSue
-
|
|
| Subject: |
PS on Health Care
|
|
Date:
|
2/10/2009 9:18:42 AM
|
My mother had a PPO plan with Aetna when she was diagnosed with cancer at age 62. The insurance company was very involved with deciding her treatment choices and often disagreed with her doctors on the best treatment. Taking them to court wasn't a choice, she needed immediate treatment. We knew her cancer was terminal but I didn't like being told by the insurance company caseworker that it didn't matter what the treatment was since it was terminal. We were looking at quality of life issues more than extending life. It has been almost 14 years and I still get angry.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
PS on Health Care
|
|
Date:
|
2/10/2009 12:25:46 PM
|
Believe me, you won't see me as an advocate for socialized medicine.
A friend's sister had a very rare form of breast cancer and was denied Tamoxifen because her cancer only has a 20% survival rate in five years and the cost/benefit ratio was not in her favor. Although she has defied the odds, she still doesn't get the same regular follow ups that she would have in the US and if/when she does get them, she isn't always assigned to a place near her home.
I was really hoping that they would come up with a plan similar to what they offer government employees (and members of Congress) with mulitiple carriers, multiple cost plans and levels of coverage. It's one of the few perks that government employees really get. Of course, my plan just went up $36 a month, but it is still a bargain.
|
| Name: |
lamont
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Personally Speaking.....
|
|
Date:
|
2/10/2009 1:07:04 PM
|
I would 1st like to opt out of social security and participate in our Senators and House of Rep's pension plan. I have never understood how they can legislate the ignorant masses into SS yet, make themselves exempt. In addition, I don't mind continuing my $700 a month premium payment to Blue Cross as, most likely, I would be dead if I was on socialized medicine.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Personally Speaking.....
|
|
Date:
|
2/10/2009 1:35:02 PM
|
What is the Congressional retirement plan?
I was under the very good government retirement plan (CSRS)and eventually, I was allowed to also have a Thrift Savings Plan (but no matching contributions). A very good deal indeed (and one of the things that kept me working for the government all those years despite lucrative outside offers), but in the early 80's all new employees then fell under the much less rewarding Federal Employees Retirement (FERS) which is made up of SS, a tiny gov't pension and their contribution to the Thrift Savings Plan (they had matching contributions).
Under the government health insurance, I also have BCBS, but I don't think I'm paying anything near $700 a month. Retirees are not subsidized, but I get to participate in the group plan.
Is your $700 a month self or a family plan?
|
| Name: |
lamont
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Personally Speaking.....
|
|
Date:
|
2/10/2009 2:42:47 PM
|
Pre 1984 our wonderful DC politicians thought it a great idea for the unwashed masses to contribute to SS although, they were exempt. Post 1984, members of Congress did have to contribute to SS however, they still received a pension combined with SS and they had, and still have, the Thrift Savings Plan. This 401k type plan contributes 1% for the Govt. employee up front. Then, matches $ for $ on the next 3% and 50 cents on the $ for the next 2%. The average annual pension for members of Congress who retired under CSRS is over $52,000 and to qualify for a Gov't pension, they only have to have 5 years of service. Sweeeeet!
We should be so lucky.
Oh yeah Hound, my $700 monthly premium to BCBS is for both me and my wife but, we have a $2,500 deductible. Not cheap by any means but, trust me, well worth it.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Personally Speaking.....
|
|
Date:
|
2/10/2009 5:56:27 PM
|
I wonder what the average years of "service" are for Congressional members?
|
|
|
New Post
Search
Off-Topic Forum
Reply
»
Alabama Lakes
»
Lake Martin
Login
|
Home
