Finally! After Decades of Trying, We have Sanity in Our Health Care System

I would agree that the corporate influence has reached deep into the pockets of many congressional reps on both sides. I make a very small distinction between the Republicans and the Democrats though. The Republican Party is 100% across the board in lock-step unison with the wealthy interests. Always have been, always will be. The reach of these very powerful corporations has not escaped the Democratic Party either. When I asked Bill Foster if he were going to take lobbyist money during his campaign, he said that if he didn't, he would be at a very serious competitive disadvantage and more or less said, "If the other guy puts his gun down, I'll put mine down".
That dynamic pretty much lays out the problem no matter how many political parties we have. They can always be corrupted by money by simply donating to one and disadvantaging the others who in turn have to court the same money sources and the corruption continues. The only possible way to ever end this cycle of corruption is to publicly fund the candidates ourselves with tax money. Believe me, it would pay off in spades down the road and the people that we send to Washington, wouldn't have to spend so much time fundraising and they could actually do the work we sent them there to do.

 

John McCain wasn't, and niether was Guilliani. The Dems have always been more prone to corporate payoffs than the republicans...ALWAYS. See Chicago, See DMCA...See Kennedy's.

Republicans have a much better record...see Sherman-Anti-trust et al.

Ruben

 

BS Moen. There is no price control built into the bill and its a fixed market with no competition. If you understood anything about the healthcare system at all, you would KNOW that this is going to push insurance pricing by the protected health care benefit provider companies through the roof. The only break on their pushing prices up is now that the public will get pissed off at them and do something politically. And that is not going to happen because they're well paid lobbies just got a 32 million customer BOOST in funding. Do you actually UNDERSTAND how healthcare economics works?

HBM (or HMO) has 50 million people tied into their network, with minimal competition. They go to Pharmacy company ABC and tell them, "Your drug is going to excluded from the formular unless you give us 40 dollars for each prescription that is filled under our plan. Pharmacy company ABC says, OK. And next month raises the cost of drug XYZ 60 dollars....because NOBODY gives a rats @$$ about the actually costs. They all graft the system until its breaking point.

So explain to me how forcing 32 million people who can't afford "insurance" is a liberal agenda? I'm awaiting for the answer. This graft is going to make the Wall Street bail outs look like small time money, meanwhile companies like GM, and their workers, are being thrown under the bus.

Ruben

 

ANYTHING you do in this system is going to cause COSTS to go up. The 32 million people without insurance is the only negative economic force on healthcare prices, and hence hospitals are struggling to stay solvent because of it. If the rest of the system was holding down costs, these hospitals would be in the BLACK

 

Wrong, but also stupid. Everyone is ALREADY in the market. There is no "pool risk". Those Health Benifit companies AREN'T insurance companies that profit from actuarial calculations like FIRE insurance or FLOOD insurance. Maybe you didn't NOTICE that the big insurance companies never get involved in healthcare. Let me know when your health pan is run by Loyds of London or All-State. This argument is SO stupid that it is deceitful.

 

Here is one BETTER. How about everyone pays CASH except for charity programs. That will correct prices in about 2 months. See if you can charge CASH, 10K for a healthy delivery of a baby and 300 dollars for your cholesterol lowering medicine every month then.

Ruben

 

I'll tell you.

It is because the Republicans currently sucking hind teet. So their goal is to push the Democrats off those big corporate teets up front so they can get the good stuff. Doesn't matter the issue. The goal is just to get back on them teets the Dems are enjoying right now.

 

I agree about private funding.

However, I contend that only having 2 viable parties is what leads to the extremism, corruption and gridlock we have today. There is no need to compromise or work together. No need to build coalitions. No need to move toward the center on anything.

All you have to do is ram stuff through if you are the team in the lead. Or stall and lie and defame and try to get back on top if you are the team currently in the lead.

 

You are utterly delusional if you believe what you just wrote. Who was defending the insurance companies during the health care debate? Who is defending the banks currently from regulation that would prevent another financial meltdown? Who just gave corporations the same rights as citizens and equated money with freedom of speech? You guessed it...Republicans. If you actually believe that the GOP isn’t the legislative arm of corporate America, and the Democrats aren’t their fallback plan, you are just biased beyond rationality and you can just go along and enjoy yourself on planet denial

 

All you are advocating for is health care for those that can afford it. The rest be damned. We would have a two tiered system. One for the very wealthy and the rest would be in your "charity programs". Who funds those charity programs, you don't say. If your parents are poor and you are born with a birth defect, too bad, just live with it. If you develop cancer, just die because treatment is expensive. If you are beaten and raped but can't afford the hospital stay, go home and don't get beaten and raped the next time. You just gotta love compassionate conservatism at it's finest.

 

Didin't BO promise to take public funds during the thr primaries only to break that promise once the campaign kicked in? Hmmmmm.

 

Man, talk about hyperbole, lefty talking points and scare tactics!
Folks with cancer have never been denied treatment...Medicaid has always been available for children born with birth defects...in the case of rape, rich & poor alike would typically go to an emergency room where treatment wouldn't be denied.

And the difference in your "2-tiered system" would merely be based on who pays- the patient or the government, right?

 

David still waiting for you to give me a link to were President Obama promised that Unemployment woudnt rise above 8.5%

 

I find your naiveté cute. Go to Google and type in the phrase, "cancer patient denied treatment". See how many stories you find of people being denied treatments for any number of reasons. You have to qualify for Medicaid and most people in this country don’t regardless of whether you have a birth defect or not. I never said treatment for rape victims was denied in emergency rooms, I said that they wouldn’t be admitted to the hospital without the money to pay for the hospital stay much less receive follow-up care or crisis counseling without the ability to pay for such services.

“And the difference in your "2-tiered system" would merely be based on who pays- the patient or the government, right?” What are you asking?????? Try not to embed a statement in a question.

 

You'll have to do this legwork yourself...I have neither the time nor desire to do it for you.

 

It's troubling that you find anything about me "cute".

 

People without a sense of natural curiosity probably turn out a lot like you. You'd rather be content in your long-held beliefs than know the truth. This is a quality that I have always suspected the Right wingers in this country have an abundance of.

 

Cut it out NOW

 

So you wanna get personal, do you?
I'm sure if anyone with conservative beliefs brought someone's wife into the arguement they would be banned immediately.

 

How would you know if I, or anyone else, would have a "natural sense of curiosity"?