Frankly, I just don't see putting the blame entirely on Bush. We've been headed down this path for many years and there is plenty of "blame" to go around.

I recall when I was looking to buy another house a few years back and getting approved for a $500,000 loan on an income that would NO WAY justify that. With a tiny down payment to boot. THAT was my first clue something was really wrong with the real estate market. I turned it down, didn't want to borrow money from a bank that was stupid enough to lend me that much! :)

The real point is: What are going to do about the crisis now? It's a pretty deep hole were in.

Ahhh, STOP digging deeper in debt? That would be a start.

Maybe, maybe not. Sometimes you gotta spend to make or save money. Escalating cost of health care aint going away. We need to take action, have been needing to take action for a long time.

(...aint, gotta, eh eh, that should fire up theire grammEr police).

We're lighting the torches...

Further bankrupt our already bankrupt country for the lazy and ignorant that will NOT help themselves. How could that be a bad idea?

Why don't you go out and spend 25 times your net worth tomorrow. Using your spend to make money theory, you should be worth 25 times more in a couple of months.

But I bet you'll have a real hard time cashing a check, anywhere.

Now see THERE is the fundamental problem with you "radicals"!

So everyone that needs health care because they lost their job and their insurance is as you describe above? Are you getting dizzy sitting up there on the mountain looking down on your fellow Americans from such lofty hieghts? Sounds like it...

Perhaps....but you have scored bonus points for correctly working in the Present Perfect Progressive tense into a post.

:cool:

I can't figure out how to get the "drawl" right around these parts, but I working on it. :)

This shows the importance of this subject and the lobbyists love it.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aZdbr0YXz5jI

Wayne

The new Infomercial.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdgeS...layer_embedded

Have you ever been to a NASCAR Race ?
 

It might be impossible to underestimate the intelligence of the American Public. You don't even have to look at the data ....you might get a good idea from just looking at the popular media. What is even more disturbing is that not only are they dumb they are mean. How TV characters like Simon Cowell, Judge Judy, Nance Grace, Jerry Springer...etc.. can be popular is a bad sign that a small but significant portion of of our society is badly damaged.:mad:

If millions 'need' health insurance, put them on Medicare until they get back on their feet - those that cannot afford it - put them on Medicaid.

As to private insurance - tweak it - by law - extend Cobra coverage until the covered person secures a new job or goes on Medicare, eliminate pre-existing conditions as a way to turn down coverage, assist self-employed persons to establish 'group coverage' for buying power and about 200 others tweaks that will not cost the government one dime.

Your obummer was ranting about health care when the economy was cooking. Health care was not in crisis then and it is not in crisis now. What is in crisis and the ONLY reason for the 'big push' is obummer's influence. He KNOWS and you should too, it is SO obvious, that this IS his singular chance. The health care bill fails and he is finished. A lame duck with over 3 years left.

People that have lost jobs still get health care same as the lazy, ignorant, people that will not help themselves ALWAYS did and do. And getting health care does not cause one to lose their house or car. Bankruptcy laws protect that. Altho bankruptcy laws are on the ropes under this insane administration. Being out of work and out of money is a greater danger to losing their homes than health problems are.

NOT asking someone else to share their wealth with me is not a lofty height, it is level ground. Those demanding others support them are crawling in the sewers.

Most people cannot afford Cobra coverage. Extending it is not going to help. I was laid off last year and collected unemployment for 2 weeks before landing a new gig. I qualified for the max unemployment number (about $625 per week back then). Paying for Cobra coverage would have been about $1700 per month.

The unemployment benefit comes to $32500 per year - but that benefit still gets taxed.
The Cobra coverage cost would have been $20500 per year.

Under this scenario a family of 4 with a single income who gets laid off is screwed. Do you decide to pay for medical coverage, or food and a place to live?:rolleyes: Wanting to extend Cobra indicates a lack of understanding of the root cause of the problem; health care is too expensive.

I do not know how to fix this particular scenario without it costing something, but I would like to figure out a way to cover people in this situation until they can get back on their feet. Maybe something like a medical loan plan that works something like unemployment benefits.

A group coverage plan for small business is a good idea and will help reduce administrative costs.

Electronic records will also help reduce costs in the long term, but there will a spike in costs to implement it. HIPAA regs could also make it a bit of a thorny issue, but one that companies familiar with network security could take advantage of. I would not mind seeing some sort of incentive to encourage modernising. This could increase the need for educated people to do this sort of work, and also add jobs.

Steve

A little problem with the pre-existing coverage.
insurance Noun
1. the agreement by which one makes regular payments to a company who pay an agreed sum if damage, loss, or death occurs.

Making insurance companies cover pre-x changes the coverage to a subsidy, not insurance. There is no IF.

Insurance companies in most if not all states are allowed to make a certain profit. To raise rates they must go to the state insurance office and apply for an increase. They must PROVE the need for that increase or it is rejected. [the fact that the approving authority is made up of politicians, is for another discussion]
Covering pre-x would automatically give them proof they MUST raise rates.

Insurance MUST be a BET. Make it a sure payout and it is not insurance or affordable for anyone.

For instance, in south Florida. EVERY auto insurance policy has lumped into the premium, $240.00 per year to cover fraud and theft alone. Then the insurance company calculates the bet. 100 miles north of Miami, auto insurance is MUCH cheaper.
Requiring coverage of pre-existing conditions would add hundreds of dollars to everyones premiums, maybe MANY hundreds.

We don't need health INSURANCE, we need reasonable costs for health treatments. Universal health INSURANCE [private, Government, or any combo of them] means NO Doctor OR patient would care at all about how much the health CARE cost. Health care is a PRODUCT, we all need to be concerned about its cost/value and we all need to "shop" for it. The present system of insurance/Government coverage makes 'shopping' impossible and prices irrelevant. Universal coverage not only won't fix that, it WILL make it worse.

Reasonable costs is certainly the goal, along those lines, procedures Doctors order that are not warranted or justifiable.

COBRA applies to companies that have 20 or more employees. There are many buisness' in Hawaii that fall short of that so COBRA is not an option for them. And of course the cost is prohibitive in many cases since you loose your job to qualify.

Personally....
 

I think there will be a bill...but if it was up to me I would rather see the States come up with solutions that fit their demographics. I would like to see the Feds resolve the National Issues on standards and access, billing, records etc... and then give the States the greatest latitude to actually design the plans. I think it was Reagan who came up with the concept of letting the people vote with their feet. One of the real strengths of this country is the diversity of States and we should take advantage of their ideas. What I don't like are the lies and the spin....

What amazes me is that Hilliary, and now Barry, refused to tackle a basic generator of higher healthcare costs even though they were/are ready to completely revamp the insurance coverage system: Tort Reform.

Of course, given the plaintiffs' bar (and their fellow travelers, the ABA) huge financial support of the liberals, it is not too surprizing. Hell, we damn near had an ambulance chaser as a Veep...Edwards.

On pre-existing conditions:

As I understand it that's not an outright "given". I read something about a panel of, I believe it was 26 people, only ONE of whom is required to be a practicing doctor, would make the final decision on a pre-x.

What struck me about that was this "panel" would have to over see so many cases it would be all but impossible for them to do so? I would imagine they would only see the cases that are involved in a law suit or are high profile. Who would make the day to day decisions in reality for the bulk of the people remains unanswered.

Edit:
Found the article I was referring to above, here's the link to Tommy De Seno's take on it.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/...ng-conditions/

What is that blue word? Mods! We have another spelling error!;)

Anyway - yep - I said the same thing as a way to get costs down - I think it was in the other Obamacare thread that got closed. The DNC will never go for it, just as the GOP will never abandon big pharma.
So these damn political parties are once again the albatross around our necks.

So do we need better election donation laws before we can fix healthcare?

Steve