A Moment for Real Reform

Well put. We have a government plans for Senators, veterans and seniors. The earth wasn't swallowed by a black hole. The two, main differences between having an insurance oligopoly running our health care system and a government bureaucracy is that the government is "somewhat" accountable, and secondly that no one in government is paid $800 Million a year (one insurance CEO's take) for finding excuses to deny health coverage.

Why is Obama the compromise? Is democrats control entire American government. Should make republicans eat *** taco, Uday think. Is make socialized health care, is make Jeremiah Wright one Supreme Court Justice, is pull troops out of Iraq, is watch conservatives head explode.

Is what Uday would do. For joke.

At the recent New Mexcio townhall meeting, I was selected to ask a question of the President. I asked why Single Payer was off the plate. And isn't it a conflict of interest to have Senator Bacus who is on the Finance committe and has accepted money from insurance companies. I was interviewed by our local channel (KOAT) which only ran a piece of what I said. I had indicated that we have the Veteran Health Plan, Indian Health Plan, Medicaid, Medicare and all the insurance companies and that it was a convuluted mix. Why couldn't we just have one. I also said that Taiwan had just modled their health plan after our Medicare and what couldn't we do that. Please see the clip. http://www.koat.com/video/19462469/index.html

For those of you who think Obama really beleives that you can keep what you have now, think twice. What will happen is they will tax your benefits as income, raise the cost for companies to provide for employees forcing everyone into the governemnt healthcare. They certainly won't tell you that and make it sound like its a choice, but ultimatley it won't be a choice.
Funny how any topic you bring up, taxes are a part of it now. I guess you can't pay more than 100% of your income though.
After property taxes, state taxes and fed taxes, there will be alot of people that pay well more than 50 if not 60% of their income to the government. Sickening.

Amen. This is why I supported Hillary in the primaries over Obama. As Alter mentioned, half or a quarter of a loaf won't cut it - imagine in 4 or 8 years when Republicans decry all the money shoveled into healthcare with little to show for it. Isn't this one of the 'slate' arguments about more or less money Obama was decrying? It's not about money alone - but about making CHANGE in the system - what happened to change?

"Nothing is more expensive than free health care".
So true.
To complete the picture, folks should read and consider this: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/05/14/death_of_us_healthcare__96474.html
aloha
DrG

Any health insurnce plan which allow the greedy, for-profit "free market" comapnies to call the shots will be worse than useless. As they do now, they will continue to deny coverage to many by cherry-picking only the healthiest Americans to cover. There will still be large co-payments and crushing deductibles which many average working people cannot afford. If President Obama lacks the will to propose universal, single payer coverage, he needs to punt and just the let the private sector continue to get run roughshod over the health care needs of most Americans.

izageek: You are correct. Absolutely. My point is; you CANNOT implement anything with such a broad scope without boundaries. LBJ did it with "Relief" which turned into "welfare" with is now the chains of poverty that leads to higher crime and the rest you know. While health care reform is long overdue; to rush into it; without scoping the project; common sense rules with regard to abuse blah blah. Quite frankly, government subidized sliding fees might be an idea. This thing is SO HUGE; it has to have some boundaries. And BTW, I thank you for not being rude to my somewhat social conservative post.

REINSTATE THE BAN ON ADVERTISING PERSCRIPTION DRUGS.
Clinton lifted the ban, medical costs have quadrupled since then.
I don't want to pay for advertising Viagra to Horny Old men.
We'd save millions

Please consider this option for providing true health care reform.

The Veterans Administration has been controlling the problems with access, cost, quality, and malpractice successfully for years.

Costs of health care paid for by government programs, (Medicare-Medicaid etc.) could be reduced, to a fraction of their current expenditures, with better outcomes, if the services for these programs were delivered from a civilian VA style National Health Care System.

A dual system that offered individuals and businesses the choice of either free, government, owned and operated, civilian VA style health care, funded by a national sales tax, no insurance, no co pays, free prescribed treatments and medications, simple no hassles care, and free period.

The other option for individuals and businesses well served and happy with their existing systems could continue paying for and keeping the private system that they like.

Private care could also be purchased at anytime without loosing privileges to use public care.

Private care would allow for the unlimited choice of doctors, clinics, hospitals, timing, and treatments, Ford Fiesta or Rolls-Royce, but it would require the user to pay for their health service, either by self pay, company pay, private insurance, whatever, but no government payments would be paid to private providers for private care.

Businesses choosing national health care would free themselves from all financial burdens or any involvement in any way for the health services their employees receive.

This would apply to companies the size of General Motors or as small as Joe's Pizza.

The system could be jump started by acquiring health delivery systems around the country that would choose to sell to the new National Health Care System.

This article, (The Best Care Anywhere by Phillip Longman)

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com...

documents how the VA was transformed by Dr. Kizer, into a system that is producing the highest quality health care in the country.

It is in everyone's best interests to have a healthy population that enjoys the most comfortable, productive, and happy life possible.

A large population of infectious unhealthy citizens interacting within society would be a health threat to all citizens.

If these real changes were made not only would health care be fixed but the savings for, taxpayers, individuals, families, and businesses using this system will be instantly and perpetually recycled back into the economy.

What we really need to be looking at is Tort Reform. The single largest contributor to the high cost of health care in the US is the need for physicians to "cover" themselves by ordering high-cost tests that are most likely not needed, but they request anyways. These tests aren't done out of necessity, but out of fear that they might be sued if conventional diagnostic methods don't catch a condition. Eliminate the threat of litigation, eliminate the largest portion of the soaring health care costs.

We also need to have a government emphasis on wellness. It's much more cost effective to keep someone healthy, than it is to treat someone with a disease. Although, that might not go over all too well, we have that mentality in the US of "You can't tell me what to eat, you can't tell me to excercise, you can't tell me not to smoke".

When you say "we" would pay a premium; you are assuming that everyone pays; not true. Either by circumstance or choice; certain persons will not be paying and those of us that do will be paying double or more than what we pay now. Question? Do I have the legal obligation as a taxpayer to see my monies treating gangbangers, crackheads and able bodied persons who use the ER for a condo?

Perfect title Jonathan, blah, blah, blah

I think there is a VERY big consept that has been thoroughly overlooked in this entire debate and I've seen news personalities and experts alike exaggerate and mutilate the concept of the cost involved in a national healthcare insurance system. First if the system costs 1.2 trillion dollars that is GROSS COSTS!!! Second the system would not be free. It would charge premiums like any other healthcare insurance policy. The difference is that it would be not for profit. SO what we truly need is an estimate of what the prjected shortfall would be. I've never seen anyone undertake a private business by making estimates of costs alone and ignoring profitability or money earned. Its ludicrous and the media in general needs to unstick its head from the darker recesses of its anatomy. THANKS I need that rant!

If you would like to help pressure our government to pass single payer health care please join our voting bloc at:
http://www.votingbloc.org/Health_Bloc.php

Wait until reality sinks in and we see how the insurance industry gang rapes the working class even more than they do now, to pay for a bogus health care program that will generate trillions in profits for them..