Health Care Reform

[Meem]

Discuss.

The two thing I would like to mention off the start. Rush Limbaugh comparing health-care reformers to Nazi's. I would like to point out the irony of that. The Nazi's were anti-semitic, and like he is anti-healthcare reform. I saw a commercial that said congress is working on making a better health-care plan for themselves than that American people. They already make more money (which they have increased their pay vs. min wage something like 8-1 in 10 years) and they already have better health-care. War vets don't get the health-care that's currently available to congress. I wonder what Rush has to say about that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9p8x...eature=related

[labelwench]

Health Care.

What exactly is implicit in these words?

At this point in my journey, I suspect that our health is largely determined from the moment of conception and next through the nine months of gestation.

Should we be fortunate enough to emerge healthy into a loving and nurturing environment, we are incredibly lucky.

Sounds like a fairy tale already!


Before we are able to assume responsibility for our own maintainence and well-being, many things shall be done for us and to us, in the name of health.

Breast or bottle fed, cloth or Pampers, plastic or glass, natural fabrics or synthetics, natural or processed food, vaccinations or not, at home Mom and Dad or child care? (Though I have no begats, I have assisted in raising several, lol.)

Let's fast forward through school, dating, employment etc.

Nutrition and surrounds have great impact on our well being. These options are greatly variable as to what suits each individual's needs.

Clean air, pure water, a variety of foods, seem neccessary to all.

Making these readily available to all of earth's beings seems, to me, the Health Reform that is most needed.

Next, we need to make available the resources and assistance for those circumstances when our individual and collective health is compromised. That's the part that gets quarrelsome, when resources are limited or time is a factor.

Interested in what ideas yourself and other members have on delivery of restorative health services, being as health needs no such aid.

Thank you for starting this thread, Meem. Good health and maintaining same, should be a priority for most, if not all.

Regards,

Labelwench

[SteveA]

Discuss.

The two thing I would like to mention off the start. Rush Limbaugh comparing health-care reformers to Nazi's. I would like to point out the irony of that. The Nazi's were anti-semitic, and like he is anti-healthcare reform.

Look at who's doing the aggressing though. In the case of the Nazi's they were willing to go around and use force to build a better nation (in their opinion, and at the expense of a lot of non-believers).

I'm certain there were many Jewish people who were anti-Nazi as well, but which group was the one with guns putting the others in prison if they didn't comply with their plans?

I'm not trying to say that Rush isn't himself a hypocrit with regard to other issues (though I haven't heard his show in a long time), and though comparing them to Nazi's is extreme, the analogy isn't inapplicable.

I saw a commercial that said congress is working on making a better health-care plan for themselves than that American people.

Probably a government school would say the same thing and I'm certain the billions in taxes they spend on public service propoganda/annoucements would say the same. The president would probably agree also.

Many insurance and medical companies would agree too. I bet McDonalds would agree about the economic and health benefits of passing a law saying everyone must eat a BigMac every day or potentially have police haul you off. On top of it they could triple their prices and lower the quality of the food and you'd still be forced to eat it.

They already make more money (which they have increased their pay vs. min wage something like 8-1 in 10 years)

That's another problem - inflation. The Federal Reserve keeps printing up more paper to pay for a ton of similar things in a manner anyone else would go to prison for.

So though people may earn more dollars, the buying power of the dollar has dropped because people are being forcibly coerced to accept paper in exchange for tangibly valuable goods. (Wouldn't it be great if I could use painted sea shells as $100 bills and for anyone not accepting them, there's my "bodyguards" to deal with them?)

and they already have better health-care.

I'd agree that technology has become better but this has been countered to an extent by lots of laws limiting the health industry. The FDA denies the use of many medications and treatments and the paperwork involved in the medical indiustries just keeps growing ... I think it's amazing to find that some people now have to ask permission to see a doctor and emergency rooms used to be very accessible but now, if the emergency room hasn't shut down yet, there's a waiting list and you'll likely get rejected anyway.

Medical costs, not simply in terms of dollars but in terms of percentage of income have gone up very significantly and not only that but the amount of money taken indirectly via. taxes or regulations to pay for non-personal use has gone up as well. Of course, if you're one of the semi-lucky few who has it taxpayer subsidized, then it's not as much of an issue, but overall the costs go up and the availability drops for everyone because of the inefficiencies that the laws create in it (there are many ways people take advantage of and abuse the public system) and yet they still expect us to give them and live with more of the same.

And even if somehow they came up with some sort of perfect plan, there's still the question of why do other people have to accept it and what power in the Constitution granted them the right to determine so much of the detail over individuals health and choices regarding it. Heck, if someone wanted to drink themselves to death with alcohol, I consider that to be their right as long as they don't trash the neighborhood doing it. (How many people do that anyway? We don't have a law yet directly against it as far as I know, but given the chance I'm certain some lawmakers would like to include that one ... heck we could make a list of how everyone should live and decide yes or no on whether everyone should be expected to wear red clothing or denied wearing red clothing).

I wish there were fewer people trying to save everyone elses soul at gunpoint.

War vets don't get the health-care that's currently available to congress. I wonder what Rush has to say about that.

I don't get the healthcare congress gets either ... does congress get some sort of special health care too? When did that happen?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9p8xxgT748&feature=related

I know it's stifling at times and a lot of them are legally required or public "service" annoucements.

Half the reason I don't like medical insurance is because of the paperwork involved.

Just say "No" to national healthcare. We already have national healthcare. It's just a few people in power that want to run the show (just like Bush and buddies with oil and pharmeceutical companies, but this is the second option - it's a difference of whether or not you want your mandatory BigMac with or without pickles)

[Meem]

Healthcare for profit is failing its purpose, a better life for the people served, not serving it. There is a difference in making money and profiteering. Nazi's profiteered from slave labor. Americans profiteered from slave labor. At some point, every country that was or has been on this planet has profiteered from slave labor. We have gone from being slaves to the man to slaves of the "dollar."

Republicans are spending all their time stirring debate over problems in the plan, instead of trying to make it better. They don't want it to change, it's fine the way it is, we can make money just fine. First thing I learned in national government was ... republicans want to protect their money. Start pointing out ways to make things better and get off the damnation bandwagon.

Make McDonald's go green. They want to sell burgers fine. Burgers with no GMO's, organic/natural beef. No more toxic add-ons. I will take a 100% natural/organic Big-Mac with a biodegradable wrapper please. No more disposable cups. Don't bring your own cup, nothing to drink for you. I am not crazy about Wal-mart, but if they would actually do what they are talking about, introducing a green label ... that's a start. I would suggest, for people that eat meat, be "forced-made-required" to care for one calf from birth till slaughter and see if they could do it. I don't think I could. So much forest and land get used to raise cattle that feed fewer people then the same land would with crops growing on them. Eat more chicken, they take up less space.

Every grade level through "high-school" should have "green" classes. School's should have greenhouses and grow their own vegetables year round, and kids of all ages could spend X amount of time in the green house, learning about the the value of how the systems operate. If I ever happen across a large sum of money, these are the type of things I would try to initiate with it. Solar panels and vegetables at schools. Get the schools off the grid and get them started on healthy nutrition, as well getting kids more involved with the technology that makes it work. I'm just a stupid dreamer though.

Every-one's looking for the magic bullet, pill, looking at all the problems and skipping over possible solutions, or not even bothering to try to be a part of the solution, just scream and yell about all the problems and not try to do anything about it. Something has to change, and soon.

http://www.colbertnation.com/home

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzSNsMy98BY

Rush ... big-pharma supporting that pill habit?

[Meem]

It really doesn't matter all that much if you believe in "the christian" bible to me or not. Anyone spiritual, or non spiritual should be able to understand the lesson that could be learned. This is what I understand to be one of the most important lessons in it, Genesis 4:9

And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?

And if you don't know the story, Cain slew Abel out of jealousy ... his own brother.

[SteveA]

Healthcare for profit is failing its purpose, a better life for the people served, not serving it. There is a difference in making money and profiteering. Nazi's profiteered from slave labor.

What do you mean by profiteering? If I go to work and earn money am I profiteering? Am I suppose to work for nothing? Should I not try to improve my life as well as benefit others in a mutual exchange when I work?

If I have critical skills, then should I spend them doing something that has little value for people or doing those things they'd prefer me to do most? Would I be profiteering by trying to get better compensation for my labor?

Do the leaders desiring to have greater control over our health circumstances have good compensation already? Would they be considered to be profiteers in your opinion?

Americans profiteered from slave labor.

Some did, though ultimately it's not a very economically successful system as people are not, in general, working for their own best interest (obviously having others satisfied can also be in ones interest as well - it's generally a mutually beneficial relationship, or at least it should be unless someone is suppose to be a slave).

At some point, every country that was or has been on this planet has profiteered from slave labor. We have gone from being slaves to the man to slaves of the "dollar."

The dollar was also constructed by government. If you have complaints about the dollar, then what makes figurative tokens for healthcare something that will be different?

Republicans are spending all their time stirring debate over problems in the plan, instead of trying to make it better.

I'm certain there are many Republicans that want it as well.

The problem arose when the plan was created and not by people who oppose enforcing it. For example, let's say that Bush had proposed giving "free national gasoline" to everyone. Bush himself could not produce this gasoline nor can lawmakers magically vote gasoline into your car.

So how do you actually fill up everyones tank? Well someone's got to make and work for and pay for etc. all the supposedly "free" gasoline. So the plan goes ahead and says that oil producers will get government subsidies that pay for all the oil they produce (and it will end up being at probably double the price people would otherwise be willing to pay for it).

So now people get "free" gasoline (and we find that a lot of people in the U.S. end up working for the oil companies to get their increased tax money back) and people use more gas than they normally would because it's supposedly "free" now and the oil companies end up making maybe 4 times as much money as before (and guess who paid for all the commericials, public service messages, environmental studies and other propoganda to convince everyone how great national "free" gas coverage was? Taxpayers mostly along with a few of the companies that got their agenda on the political list).

The same goes for national healthcare. Politics is already a big business for the medical indistry and this is just the next round of scams to hit.

I don't know how long you've been following how politics works, but I'm certain that over time, if you read between the lines and look at the direction things appear to continue to head, you'll see the gameplan.

They don't want it to change, it's fine the way it is, we can make money just fine.

But you could earn even more if the "customers" are forced by law to buy your service. That's not just trying to earn a profit but coercion using force.

First thing I learned in national government was ... republicans want to protect their money. Start pointing out ways to make things better and get off the damnation bandwagon.

And who shouldn't want to protect themselves and their labor and resources etc.?

Sice you brought up the NAZI issue, if NAZIs had wanted Jewish people to pay for NAZI programs, should they pay or resist it because it would ultimately harm them? Should slaves in some country go along and assist in helping others take their livelyhood and independence or should they resist and hold the cancer at bay?

Sure, maybe Republicans are a minority and so were Jews and Blacks etc.

If you can vote yourself a slice of someone elses pie would you do it? Why not learn how to make your own? I wouldn't help someone steal from someone else.

It's very simple - who wants to take resources from whom and why do they require laws, which are unique in that they tolerate this as a forcible acquisition. Whoever is say that resources, need to be taken from someone else almost certainly the culprit of the conflict.

Make McDonald's go green.

Why?

They want to sell burgers fine. Burgers with no GMO's, organic/natural beef. No more toxic add-ons. I will take a 100% natural/organic Big-Mac with a biodegradable wrapper please. No more disposable cups. Don't bring your own cup, nothing to drink for you.

Fine, go ahead and start something up like that. A lot of other people will still prefer McDonalds. They won't make you eat their food and you won't make them eat yours.

I am not crazy about Wal-mart, but if they would actually do what they are talking about, introducing a green label ...

Here's a great idea. We all reduce the size and power of the federal government and then we'll have 50 independent states to see what works - there are probably already some states that would lean with you on your efforts/desires.

The only thing we don't need is more conflict in the public/political realm.

Every grade level through "high-school" should have "green" classes.

OMG, you're scaring me. How about we teach them about how great a president Bush was too? And maybe teach them how we need a new federal army to stop "homeland" terrorists.

Whatever happened to "Reading, writing and arithmetic"?

School's should have greenhouses and grow their own vegetables year round, and kids of all ages could spend X amount of time in the green house, learning about the the value of how the systems operate.

You know what, I actually wouldn't have a problem with that but once again it's not something for public schools. Notice how this wouldn't have been must less of a problem with private schools because there's a lot more variety and responsiveness when there's some diversity and competition (and you won't have creationists arguing with evolutionists over what to teach or homosexuals and heterosexuals arguing over what to teach children in sexual education etc.)

If I ever happen across a large sum of money, these are the type of things I would try to initiate with it. Solar panels and vegetables at schools. Get the schools off the grid and get them started on healthy nutrition, as well getting kids more involved with the technology that makes it work. I'm just a stupid dreamer though.

No, you're not a stupid dreamer and I can actually relate in many ways, but the problem is that we've got most people looked into a single educational system and the diversity isn't there and I admit I think my kids would do better learning other things, though if this was additional it might not be a problem.

Anyway, just like national healthcare is a bad idea, so is federal control over education. Anytime you put too much power in too few hands you're asking for problems.

[SteveA]

And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?

Yes, you give a good example here, it's not up to Cain to determine what health Abel should be in. Cain wanted a family healthcare system. Instead Abel should be the one determining his health.

Notice that Cain should have offered something better to Abel as a charitiable offering or free market trade etc. and hoped Abel accepted, instead of taking matters into his own hands and using force on Abel to his detriment (but maybe if Abel was Republican it would be ok, because it would just be due to self interest? ).

And if you don't know the story, Cain slew Abel out of jealousy ... his own brother.

Did Abel have better healthcare?

What's the moral of this story? Are we suppose to kill Cain before Cain kills Abel out of jealousy?

[Meem]

I am my brother's keeper, not am I?

I am my brother's keeper. I will not kill my brother.
Am I my brother's keeper? Will I kill my brother and keep for myself?
How much "money" (other form of "stuff") is a life worth?

If you have no problems keeping yourself, is there no sense of duty to help in whatever way you can to help keep your brother? Fellow "man" "being" = brother/sister.

[Meem]

The debate is not about gasoline, it's about lives, and welfare. If you think paying more taxes for the benefit of your fellow man, at some expense to having an over abundance of self worth, possibly even self righteous critical skill ... is at all comparable to Nazi's who stripped people of everything they owned, forced them to work as slaves, and then mass murdered them is comparable to the idea of health-care reform ... it is truly a sad situation.

Like I said, everyone wants to point out the "problems," not the solutions. If republicans want the reform so much, where is the republican bill? Where is the republican answer for the problem? The republican answer is fear, Obama is Hitler, a Muslim, the Antichrist, the evil man that wants "my money." He is organizing death panels in this bill. Government money would be used to kill babies ... but since people who already can't afford health-care are having babies ... and babies have no critical skills ... where is the analytical answer for that? Let them kill babies? Not my kid, no value, no worth, no profit for me, not my problem? What if the baby that dies from not having health-care as a teenager ... could have eventually gained a "critical-skill" that far exceeds anything you could have ever dreamed of? I mean it's possible right? But giving back is not nearly as important as taking what's mine?

Socialism!!!! What is Social-security? What is Medicare?

[SteveA]

I am my brother's keeper, not am I?

I am my brother's keeper. I will not kill my brother.

Would you incarcerate your brother for not going along with your health care plans?

Am I my brother's keeper? Will I kill my brother and keep for myself?
How much "money" (other form of "stuff") is a life worth?

Would you threaten someone's livelyhood to find out?

Let's say some doctor earned a lot of money ... to whatever point you'd consider profiteering? (Maybe you can give me an X dollar amount. I'm certain legislatures will fill in the blank if not).

Now what did the doctor do harmful to you or anyone else? If you think the doctor was careless or irresponsible with their skills or misrepresented their abilities etc., then that's an issue for the courts. We already have ways to discourage poor performance being a doctor.

Now do you think that punishing people from earning money in the medical industry will help people in finding the services available or will it discourage people from becoming doctors and offering these services? (Imagine it was a critical decision and you were personally responsible for implementing some policy in this regard and you had arrayed an army of police officers to enforce your decree)

If you have no problems keeping yourself, is there no sense of duty to help in whatever way you can to help keep your brother? Fellow "man" "being" = brother/sister.

Part of that responsibility is in allowing them to be themself. They don't owe me healthcare but they can rightly ask me to not intrude on whatever plans they may or may not have in this regard.

It would be different if someone was actually offering medical services in some inexpensive or charitable form. This is not the case with a national healthcare system and I'm rather certain that even if it allowed people to supposedly "opt out" it would still add additional costs elsewhere to them (the "cash for clunkers" program is a great example - not only will it increase car costs by reducing the availability of (inexpensive) vehicles but it additionally costs those who didn't have an older car $4500 for each car, plus it encourages people to go into further debt buying new cars they otherwise couldn't afford ... and at a time a lot of people are already in too much debt as it is. You might claim it helps the environment somehow, but it costs a lot of energy and resources to make new cars and the global warming issue is just a scam (and I can show a lot of reasons why it's largely all politically motivated hype as many people have been claiming). The payoff for this program is once again another "buddy group" for the government, the automotive unions - a lot of people have been saying for decades that these unions were destroying the industry and sure enough it proves true, yet we're suppose to go along and throw more resources at it to try to solve it ... it'll stick around and we'll have to keep doing the same until people finally throw in the towel on this system.

I used to have hope in our system (I voted for Bush in 2000 and remembered people claiming we'd be at war with Iraq if he got elected and that he was in bed with the oil/energy companies ... I blew it off as just propoganda trying to intimidate people from voting for him, and what he said sounded (mostly) good. Well, it turned out that they were right and most the good things he talked about he didn't bother to stand on and the smaller group of things that I didn't like were the ones he managed to find the courage to stick to his guns on. The difference between the two parties is that one says 60% of what I like and 40% of what I don't like and you can swap the percentages around for the other ... the one thing they DO manage to agree upon once they get into office is to do the things that gain them more power and sacrifice the welfare of the country. That part is the predictable part - I couldn't complain if this was just some private company making something incredible that few people could resisist, yes even if they were SludgeBurgers, but the difference is that private companies have to keep people happy and avoid people sueing them whereas the higher up you go in government the less accountability and responsibility there is, yet the resources controlled grow - I don't bother to vote anymore as the people I'd like to see there aren't even on a ballot).