Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Seriously guys, go and find some articles about the healthcare debate and find some valid points to bring around so we can discuss the merits of this system in better detail than what a talking head like Limbaugh has said about healthcare.
(yes, conservatives go find a liberal media outlet and see what they have to say).
Nurgleboy77 wrote:Let the Clusterf*cking commence!
Amen! We can't even fix all the pot holes on the highways and the government has been trying for 60 years when the government was running at a surplus.
Potholes are caused by the cars driving over them. You don't stop them, they happen and they get filled in.
When it comes to road maintenance, you have no idea what you're talking about.
You're more adept at sophistry.
Stick to what you are good at.
A pothole (sometimes called kettle and known in parts of the Western United States as a chuckhole) is a type of disruption in the surface of a roadway where a portion of the road material has broken away, leaving a hole. Most potholes are formed due to fatigue of the pavement surface. As fatigue fractures develop they typically interlock in a pattern known as "alligator cracking". The chunks of pavement between fatigue cracks are worked loose and may eventually be picked out of the surface by continued wheel loads, thus forming a pothole.
The formation of potholes is exacerbated by low temperatures, as water expands when it freezes to form ice, and puts greater stress on an already cracked pavement or road. Once a pothole forms, it grows through continued removal of broken chunks of pavement. If a pothole fills with water the growth may be accelerated, as the water "washes away" loose particles of road surface as vehicles pass. In temperate climates, potholes tend to form most often during spring months when the subgrade is weak due to high moisture content. However, potholes are a frequent occurrence anywhere in the world, including in the tropics.
Potholes can grow to feet in width, though they usually only become a few inches deep, at most. If they become large enough, damage to tires and vehicle suspensions occurs.
You too. I'm great at knowing everything! And you're great at making snide comments that are easy to refute with the first paragraph from the wikipedia for the definition being argued.
You're becoming bicameral in giving your half you brain to the machine.
By the way, hot or cold mix?
Is that a kind of coffee? Or is this some sort of odd method by which you illustrate that I don't know much about asphalt then somehow imply that vehicles traveling on roadways aren't a cause of potholes.
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
STEP 1: All Americans for a government that abides by the Constitution change their local laws to allow the keeping of chickens by any taxpaying American.
STEP 2: Once taxpayers are allowed to keep chickens, we amend the law to allow all taxpayers to keep hogs. (After all, we wouldn’t want to discriminate now, would we?)
STEP 3: Hogs proliferate from sea to shining sea.
STEP 4: Government workers begin to disappear.
STEP 5: Missing government workers are replaced with new government workers.
STEP 6: The new government workers disappear too.
STEP 7: In short order, no one wants to be a government worker.
STEP 8: With a shrinking pool of government workers, fewer laws interfering with private enterprise are enacted.
STEP 9: Smaller government at all levels - federal, state, city, and local - result in HUGE SAVINGS being realized with the tax dollars returned to the taxpayers.
STEP 10: After eating off the FAT OF THE LAND, the tens of millions of hogs are sold to the Chinese for hefty profit, thereby paying off the debt caused by said government workers. America is now debt free.
Excellent...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/03/22 04:56:00
Pipboy101 wrote:Here is a couple things that can solve any healthcare issue which is a hell of a lot cheaper.
and
True for the first one, but the second one is cheaper for the first 2 years, after which the not paying for healtcare tax would be greater and therefore make the second option cheaper.
You understand that government is not taking over healthcare, don't you? Because that's been a basic component of this debate for a year now, and I'm really struggling to see how you missed it.
So either you've not followed this debate at all, or have ignored it's basic facts because it's easier to make sweeping allegations.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
You're becoming bicameral in giving your half you brain to the machine.
By the way, hot or cold mix?
Is that a kind of coffee? Or is this some sort of odd method by which you illustrate that I don't know much about asphalt then somehow imply that vehicles traveling on roadways aren't a cause of potholes.
Just pointing out that by saying "they happen and they get filled in" means you really don't have a clue about how the process works. It makes other proclamations that you know how the government will administer health care dubious.
The bicameral comment was an extrapolation of "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" by Julian Jaynes.
“It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood” -- Karl Popper
You understand that government is not taking over healthcare, don't you? Because that's been a basic component of this debate for a year now, and I'm really struggling to see how you missed it.
So either you've not followed this debate at all, or have ignored it's basic facts because it's easier to make sweeping allegations.
Alright, it is like the DMV telling your car insurer to insure people who run over other people, crash regularly, and set fire to cars for the sake of it (though the analogy is off by the fact that people with pre-existing conditions do not actually intentionally harm their bodies). The DMV would be directing car insurance companies what to do, guiding them in a direction they probably would not go otherwise.
JEB_Stuart wrote:I am not a fan of being forced to buy health insurance. I find that to be one of my biggest problems with the bill. I have enough problems making enough money as it is, even with a subsidized plan, I will still have to fork over some money, which I am loathe to do...
if the house bill remains as is you should have know problem getting insurance that is next to nothing or free, besides most of it wont tak effect till 2014
H.B.M.C. wrote:
"Balance, playtesting - a casual gamer craves not these things!" - Yoda, a casual gamer.
Three things matter in marksmanship -
location, location, location
MagickalMemories wrote:How about making another fist?
One can be, "Da Fist uv Mork" and the second can be, "Da Uvver Fist uv Mork."
Make a third, and it can be, "Da Uvver Uvver Fist uv Mork"
Eric
You're becoming bicameral in giving your half you brain to the machine.
By the way, hot or cold mix?
Is that a kind of coffee? Or is this some sort of odd method by which you illustrate that I don't know much about asphalt then somehow imply that vehicles traveling on roadways aren't a cause of potholes.
Just pointing out that by saying "they happen and they get filled in" means you really don't have a clue about how the process works. It makes other proclamations that you know how the government will administer health care dubious.
The bicameral comment was an extrapolation of "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" by Julian Jaynes.
So are you arguing that potholes don't happen? Or that the don't get filled in? I'm confused here because you're wrong on both counts and haven't actually stated much beyond your belief that I don't know what I'm talking about. I'll admit, I don't work in road maintenance, however I'm quite sure that holes happen when gak happens to the rocky gak thats under the cars and then dudes show up and put gak into those holes which makes them kind of go away.
Please, enlighten me. Clearly this is a simplistic description of the methodology used.
Oh, and since were comparing book quotes.
I have a fantasy where Ted Turner is elected President but refuses because he doesn't want to give up power.
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
youbedead wrote:if the house bill remains as is you should have know problem getting insurance that is next to nothing or free, besides most of it wont tak effect till 2014
Insurance companies will be barred from dropping people from coverage when they get sick. Lifetime coverage limits will be eliminated and annual limits are to be restricted.
Insurers will be barred from excluding children for coverage because of pre-existing conditions.
Young adults will be able to stay on their parents' health plans until the age of 26. Many health plans currently drop dependents from coverage when they turn 19 or finish college.
Uninsured adults with pre-existing conditions will be able to obtain health coverage through a new programme that will expire once new insurance exchanges begin operating in 2014.
A temporary reinsurance programme is created to help companies maintain health coverage for early retirees between the ages of 55 and 64. This also expires in 2014.
Medicare drug beneficiaries who fall into the "doughnut hole" coverage gap will get a $250 rebate. The bill eventually closes that gap which currently begins after $2,700 is spent on drugs. Coverage starts again after $6,154 is spent.
A tax credit becomes available for some small businesses to help provide coverage for workers.
A 10 per cent tax on indoor tanning services that use ultraviolet lamps goes into effect on July 1.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/03/22 05:27:43
youbedead wrote:if the house bill remains as is you should have know problem getting insurance that is next to nothing or free, besides most of it wont tak effect till 2014
Insurance companies will be barred from dropping people from coverage when they get sick. Lifetime coverage limits will be eliminated and annual limits are to be restricted.
Insurers will be barred from excluding children for coverage because of pre-existing conditions.
Young adults will be able to stay on their parents' health plans until the age of 26. Many health plans currently drop dependents from coverage when they turn 19 or finish college.
Uninsured adults with pre-existing conditions will be able to obtain health coverage through a new programme that will expire once new insurance exchanges begin operating in 2014.
A temporary reinsurance programme is created to help companies maintain health coverage for early retirees between the ages of 55 and 64. This also expires in 2014.
Medicare drug beneficiaries who fall into the "doughnut hole" coverage gap will get a $250 rebate. The bill eventually closes that gap which currently begins after $2,700 is spent on drugs. Coverage starts again after $6,154 is spent.
A tax credit becomes available for some small businesses to help provide coverage for workers.
A 10 per cent tax on indoor tanning services that use ultraviolet lamps goes into effect on July 1.
so i was right, mandatory insurance does nor begin until 2014
Most people will be required to obtain health insurance coverage or pay a fine if they don't. Healthcare tax credits become available to help people with incomes up to 400 per cent of poverty purchase coverage on the exchange.
H.B.M.C. wrote:
"Balance, playtesting - a casual gamer craves not these things!" - Yoda, a casual gamer.
Three things matter in marksmanship -
location, location, location
MagickalMemories wrote:How about making another fist?
One can be, "Da Fist uv Mork" and the second can be, "Da Uvver Fist uv Mork."
Make a third, and it can be, "Da Uvver Uvver Fist uv Mork"
Eric
WarOne wrote:Alright, it is like the DMV telling your car insurer to insure people who run over other people, crash regularly, and set fire to cars for the sake of it (though the analogy is off by the fact that people with pre-existing conditions do not actually intentionally harm their bodies). The DMV would be directing car insurance companies what to do, guiding them in a direction they probably would not go otherwise.
Tell me the government is not doing that.
Yes, government is telling insurers they can't reject people with pre-existing conditions. Is that a bad thing?
And how is government regulation comparable to complete take over?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/03/22 06:13:42
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
WarOne wrote:Alright, it is like the DMV telling your car insurer to insure people who run over other people, crash regularly, and set fire to cars for the sake of it (though the analogy is off by the fact that people with pre-existing conditions do not actually intentionally harm their bodies). The DMV would be directing car insurance companies what to do, guiding them in a direction they probably would not go otherwise.
Tell me the government is not doing that.
Yes, government is telling insurers they can't reject people with pre-existing conditions. Is that a bad thing?
And how is government regulation comparable to complete take over?
Hush, he doesn't understand what premiums are. Let him enjoy his little teenage rage fantasy.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/03/22 06:14:54
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
I'm watching Michael Steele talk about what will transpire in the wake of this bill. He continually posits that the bill will cost 2 trillion dollars as it will give roughly 33% of the nation access to healthcare. I understand the value that number has in terms of rhetoric, but to seriously believe that 33% of the nation is going to double annual spending on healthcare is almost mind bogglingly stupid; especially given that the most expensive patients are already supported via medicare.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/03/22 08:15:47
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
Yes, government is telling insurers they can't reject people with pre-existing conditions. Is that a bad thing?
And how is government regulation comparable to complete take over?
Sigh...now you make me have to get all serious and stuff.
On the first point, depends on what road you wish to take in addressing this issue in terms of rating government directed and regulated health care as a "bad thing."
The United States has a strong history of passing laws which bars discrimination of people based on a perceived inequality brought about by their color, race, gender, sexual orientation, economic background and various other socially constructed identities that contribute to perceptions that hinder a person from what society and the government believe people should be entitled to. In this case, the government seeks to address something akin to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Information_Nondiscrimination_Act by effectively forcing insurers not to discriminate people against pre-existing conditions of health.
In my opinion, this is a "good thing" that government is taking steps to help these people who cannot get coverage and help pay for medical treatments that balloon out of control for families unable to privately fund their healthcare costs.
The burden of taking on the costs of the new provisions to provide healthcare for people may indirectly cause healthcare costs to rise faster than inflation and living wages that must rise as well in order to cover potentially higher costs.
Historically, American has progressed foward in giving healthcare coverage to all, with a serious push beginning with Progressives in the early 20th century. Up to this point in history, we have had the ability to cover those under current federal laws with healthcare.
The graver concern I have is the cost. Republicans have a ring of truth that the bill may cost more than we thought. The government office associated with figuring out how much initiatives and bills will cost the United States may have an accurate appraisal that the bill will save the federal government money. It could also be wrong. The article sums up the fears of what could be a very expensive bill that won't see the final cost until years down the road.
Being afraid of cost however does not give you a sufficiently justifiable reason to call this bill "a bad thing."
What has gone from a clear and defined goal of a government run health care system to what we don't even know what it is. The rammifications of this bill are not fully understood yet. The Democrats rushed this bill through the House in order to get it passed:
The 114-page reconciliation package (plus 39 pages on student loans, included to make reconciliation work better in the Senate) just released by the House is a reminder of the two basic problems with what the Democrats are doing. The first is that too much is being done too quickly. True, we have had nearly three months to think about the Senate bill since it was rushed through that body.
But the House reconciliation bill would change it in fundamental ways, and House leaders want to pass it in just three days. In the meantime, we have no choice but to rely on the summary provided by House staff. The bill itself is stuffed with unhelpful language like, “in subclause (i), by striking ‘90’ and inserting ‘94,’” and so forth and so on, ad infinitum, referring back to the Senate bill.
The second point ties into the previous point about unintended costs.
But aside from what the bill actually brings to the table, it now spawns a political battle that will span the entire year as elections get underway for pivtoal House and Senate seats.
The health care bill has now spawned a monster of epic proportions. Unleashed, it will consume the debate for upcoming elections that may turn the tide for Democrats or Republicans. Emboldened, the Democrats may push for other sweeping changes to law. If the public approves their mandate, it could mean a political shift that places America closer to center-right countries such as traditional European Western Democracies. It could further radicalize the Repulican right wing and its constituents, emboldening them with new venom and fervor to reject Obama and what his backers stand for. In that sense, the healthcare bill could be a "bad thing."
Keeping this short, the bill could give Americans more jobs. Obama has been big on tying in job creation to his other initiatives such as reducing America's fossil fuel dependency by creating more green jobs. That funny talking republican head on the Foxnews reel stated 15,000 new IRS jobs to keep track of the bill. What will this bill really do for the American economy by adding 30+ million more Americans to the insurance industry of America? What kind of impact will this bill have on the economy when the true effects of the bill are revealed.
Okay. I am done with your first statement.
Now for number two.
Well, which system would you prefer?
or
Or are both of these highly exaggerated aspects of two different sides of an argument?
Of course, given how these systems were thought up, here is how I think either way could go if left to their own devices:
I really don't care if I have to go to the DMV to get my healthcare. So long as I get some free healthcare from a company that the government runs, it is all good by me.
And lastly, how could you take those pictures seriously? If you believed I believed in the statement I made in the prior paragraph, your reading too far into my motivations to not really care about the debate at all and really focus on making humor of it instead.
Of course, this could be me doing this to your two lines of comment:
This message was edited 8 times. Last update was at 2010/03/22 08:00:26
Well, the law is now Americans must have healthcare. Take a few days to now see the rammifications to this new law and how you can use it to your advantage.
I was trying to be all righteous and you go and make me laugh.
I will enjoy watching the lawsuits. 38 states are promising lawsuits at point of writing. That whole Constitution thing is just SO inconvenient.
"The tree of Liberty needs to be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. "
Thomas Jefferson
3rd president of US (1743 - 1826)
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
I, for one, do NOT welcome our Progressive Overlords.
I thought you were leaving the country rush!
Lol. Good effort Shuma, i think thats the first lol you have had out of me mate.
We are arming Syrian rebels who support ISIS, who is fighting Iran, who is fighting Iraq who we also support against ISIS, while fighting Kurds who we support while they are fighting Syrian rebels.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
[DCM]
GW Public Relations Manager (Privateer Press Mole)
Well, here are my thoughts for those who don't care. Our healthcare "system" is a disaster. It is an endless cycle of debt that is slowly creeping over the middle class. That cycle being;
1. Someone can't afford insurance, as they make too much for Medicaid and make too little to buy a policy (Or have a preexisting condition). They are therefore without insurance.
2. That someone gets ill and requires hospitalization. Unfortunately, this means a bill that will easily reach 6 digits, perhaps more depending on issue.
3. That someone obviously can't afford to pay for that bill, provided they could not afford insurance in the first place. They default, file and the hospital eats the bill. It's estimated anywhere from 50-65% of all bankruptcy claims are due to medical bills.
4. To cover that cost, the hospital begins raising prices on mundane items and services for those whom do have insurance. Insurance companies pay more.
5. To cover that cost, insurance companies raise premiums, copays and deductibles. Insurance coverage grows more expensive with less benefits.
6. Due to raising insurance costs, less employers offer benefits and begin hiring part time people to cover shifts. The differential pay for part time/prn staff is nowhere the cost of hiring full time with benefits.
7. Due to less employers offering insurance and rising costs, more individuals can't afford insurance. The are therefore without insurance and hope they do get sick. If they do, go to step 2.
This is rather simplistic but I feel it's a honest appraisal of our issues. Slip in litigation, technology costs and nurse/physician shortages and the picture starts to become even clearer; the system is doomed to fail. Now, I have no doubt that the bill will be an unmitigated disaster from the gate. There is no way any institution, be it private or government owned, can take over the system as it is currently and 'fix it'. It will take revision upon revision and countless mistakes to find viable solutions...but we are forced to start somewhere are we not? Obviously, if we can swallow our pride a bit and look to foreign soil (Such as the Swedish health care system).... those revisions will take less time.
So, in short, I'm glad we are taking our first steps. There are portions of the bill I agree strongly with, other areas not so much...but I'm willing to compromise for us to take that first step.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2010/03/22 13:14:50
Adepticon TT 2009---Best Heretical Force
Adepticon 2010---Best Appearance Warhammer Fantasy Warbands
Adepticon 2011---Best Team Display
Y'know, it occurs to me that something happened to the "my country wrong or right" and "you can like it or GTF out"-type rhetoric we heard from 2000-2008. Wonder where that all went?
Personally, I'm mixed on the bill. However, if it makes the tea partiers retreat to their underground bunkers, I'm content to chalk it up as a win.
I am very pleased this first step towards a more socially aware and morally responsible state are being taken before my arrival, I consider it most hospitable of you folks.
MeanGreenStompa wrote:I am very pleased this first step towards a more socially aware and morally responsible state are being taken before my arrival, I consider it most hospitable of you folks.
Well, we do what we can to keep you happy.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
251 point Khador Army
245 points Ret Army
