US Healthcare

[watcher1]

A WOO for AB.  I bet she can make whatever ails you better.

[NonDairy]

My biggest issue with the National Endowment for the Arts is it gives tax money to individuals and organizations which cannot sell their wares or services on their own merits.

I can't believe I didn't pick up on this sooner. What would you rather have the National Endowment for the Arts do?

[Melissa]

My biggest issue with the National Endowment for the Arts is it gives tax money to individuals and organizations which cannot sell their wares or services on their own merits.

I can't believe I didn't pick up on this sooner. What would you rather have the National Endowment for the Arts do?

Not exist.

[Lois]

As we near the final showdown on health care reform, Reid and Pelosi tell they President they have the votes to pass a major reform bill. The biggest remaining issue; will the public insurance option be part of the new program.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/09/pelosi-and-reid-tell-president-we-have-the-votes-president-wants-bill-passed-soon.html


Pelosi and Reid Tell President: We Have the Votes; President Wants Bill Passed Soon

September 08, 2009 6:20 PM

While White House spokesman Robert Gibbs today refrained from telling reporters whether President Obama in his speech Wednesday night will set a deadline for passing health care reform, sources tell ABC News that in his private meeting with Democratic congressional leaders this afternoon the key word was urgency.

The president told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., that it is important for them to pass health care reform bills soon, the sources said.

Both leaders told the president that despite the difficult rough and tumble of the legislative process in the last few weeks, they are optimistic that both the House and Senate can pass health care reform legislation.

What will be in the bill remains an open question, though after the meeting, Reid told reporters that “we're going to do our very best to have a public option or something like a public option before we finish this work.”

[Melissa]

I'm not trusting any proposal that cannot be preceded by a clear and precise outline taking no more than five pages.  It should be provided for every American to read and indicate this is precisely what Obama and/or legislators want and show their names and signatures with the document.  It should be published online and in three major newspapers as a public service announcement.

The way these changes in law are handled now, there's too much room for trickery and modification under the table.  If the final law is not matched to the preceding proposal, the law should be instantly overturned.

As far as I'm concerned, Joe Wilson is a hero for having the guts to speak out as he did.  Did it violate decorum?  Yes.  But, I'm tired of quid quo pro.  There is public outrage against this action.  There should be public outrage in Congress before the president as a result.

Plenty of democrats called out Bush on the war.  But they didn't have the balls to do it to his face.  Joe Wilson did.

[stefanwolf]

Haha Mel, again you do dont surprise me.  Joe Wilson is my congressman.  That is the extent of his vocabulary.  "You"re a Liar"
 I didnt vote for the idiot, he isnt some hero- he was elected cause he worked for a real hero Jim Spence.  He almost was defeated last election for this same kind of total lack of grasp of the issues.  If you had heard him speak publicly about anything of substance, you would realize how much hes a  misinformed follower of the republican right.  OH wait , no you wouldnt see that cause hes just like you. 
The status quo is to kick any health reform out the window and cave to  big business. 
Get over it, move to one of those other countries where representaives are made by killing their predecessor and arent elected,  Oh BTW take joe wilson and sanford with you.

[NonDairy]

I'm not trusting any proposal that cannot be preceded by a clear and precise outline taking no more than five pages.  It should be provided for every American to read and indicate this is precisely what Obama and/or legislators want and show their names and signatures with the document.  It should be published online and in three major newspapers as a public service announcement.

Are you new?

Have you ever even seen a major piece of legislation? How about Reagan's tax reforms? I want to see you sum those up in 5 pages. Hell, the House Resolution to declare war on Iraq in 2002 in itself took 5 pages (pasted into Word in 12 point font at 1-inch margins) to say "We authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq."

I am very aware that there's a huge difference between "wrong" and "stupid." Unfortunately, you are both.

[Melissa]

Haha Mel, again you do dont surprise me.  Joe Wilson is my congressman.  That is the extent of his vocabulary.  "You"re a Liar"
 I didnt vote for the idiot, he isnt some hero- he was elected cause he worked for a real hero Jim Spence.  He almost was defeated last election for this same kind of total lack of grasp of the issues.  If you had heard him speak publicly about anything of substance, you would realize how much hes a  misinformed follower of the republican right.  OH wait , no you wouldnt see that cause hes just like you. 
The status quo is to kick any health reform out the window and cave to  big business. 
Get over it, move to one of those other countries where representaives are made by killing their predecessor and arent elected,  Oh BTW take joe wilson and sanford with you.

When you have the quote right, get back to me. 

[stefanwolf]

Haha Mel, again you do dont surprise me.  Joe Wilson is my congressman.  That is the extent of his vocabulary.  "You"re a Liar"
 I didnt vote for the idiot, he isnt some hero- he was elected cause he worked for a real hero Jim Spence.  He almost was defeated last election for this same kind of total lack of grasp of the issues.  If you had heard him speak publicly about anything of substance, you would realize how much hes a  misinformed follower of the republican right.  OH wait , no you wouldnt see that cause hes just like you.  
The status quo is to kick any health reform out the window and cave to  big business.  
Get over it, move to one of those other countries where representaives are made by killing their predecessor and arent elected,  Oh BTW take joe wilson and sanford with you.

When you have the quote right, get back to me.  

Great post by the way I see you didnt post the correction. You also neglected to say whether you actually watched The President of thiis United States Speech.
I did misquote its "You Lie"  I heard it when i was listening to the speech as "You're a Liar!"  And hes still an idiot.

[Lois]

We need some humor in this thread!  Enjoy!

More healthcare reform humor...the "Top 10 Ridiculous Quotes by Health Care Reform Opponents"

http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/healthcare/a/health-care-reform-quotes.htm

As anyone following the hysterical "debate" over health care reform knows, President Obama and his fellow socialists are trying to create death panels in order to pull the plug on grandma and kill off other undesirables, just like Hitler did in Nazi Germany. Or so the wingnuts would have us believe.

Because we like to chronicle and catalog political insanity, here are the 10 most patently ridiculous quotes about health care reform from the likes of Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Michele Bachmann.

1. "The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil." —Sarah Palin, in a message posted on Facebook about Obama's health care reform plan, (Source)

2. "Obama's got a health care logo that's right out of Adolf Hitler's playbook … Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, also ruled by dictate." —Rush Limbaugh, Aug. 6, 2009 (Source)

3. "People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless." —a July 31 editorial in Investor's Business Daily warning about end-of-life counseling in health care reform. Hawking, in fact, lives in England and has been treated by their National Health Service, which, by his own account, saved his life (Source)

4. "What we have to do today is make a covenant, to slit our wrists, be blood brothers on this thing. This will not pass. We will do whatever it takes." –Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), on what is needed to defeat health care reform, Aug. 31, 2009 (Source)

5. "You have three people in the White House that are in love with eugenics or whatever it is you would call it today. … Please dear God, read history. Please dear God read the truth of what these people have said in their own words, and ask yourself this one question: Do you trust these people enough to give them control over who lives and who dies? Because that's what health care is when you have no other choice but to go to the state." —Glenn Beck, comparing health care reform to Nazi eugenics (Source)

6. "Congress would make it mandatory — absolutely require — that every five years people in Medicare have a required counseling session that will tell them how to end their life sooner." —Betsy McCaughey, former New York lieutenant governor and originator of the "death panel" lie, July 16, 2009 (Source)

7. There is some fear because in the House bill, there is counseling for end-of-life. And from that standpoint, you have every right to fear. ... We should not have a government program that determines if you're going to pull the plug on grandma." —Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Aug. 12, 1009 (Source)

8. "We're gonna have a government rationing body that tells women with breast cancer, 'You're dead.' It's a death sentence." —FOX News Channel's Sean Hannity, June 19, 2009 (Source)

9. "That's why people need to continue to go to the town halls, continue to melt the phone lines of their liberal members of Congress, and let them know, under no certain circumstances will I give the government control over my body and my health care decisions." —Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), a pro-lifer who completely missed the irony of using the same slogan as the pro-choice movement (Source)

10. "Exercise freaks ... are the ones putting stress on the health care system." —Rush Limbaugh, June 12, 2009 (Source)

~Compiled by Daniel Kurtzman

[Poppet]

Weiner (D-NY) for Health Secretary. He has been excellent throughout this process - level, measured, clear.

[mostdeviant]

RESOLVED: That it is immoral to make a profit off of the sick and dying.

Therefore, the federal government and state governments of these United States have every legal right and moral obligation to involve themselves in Health Care reform, and to ensure that all Citizens receive the same quality of care regardless of their ability to pay. We live in the most prosperous nation in the history of the world; no one should ever die because they could not afford medical treatment.   

Commie!   

Seriously though, to say that making profit off of the sick and dying is immoral indicates that not only should health care be taken over, but also drug companies and hospitals.  It's a ridiculous assertion.  We have the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... after that your own your fucking own.  If a state chooses to create a public plan, then by all means that is that states, and it's peoples, choice.  New York for instance has a public option.  If my state voted for a plan tomorrow it would be acceptable, I wouldn't agree, but it would be acceptable.  The federal government on the other hand, should have no hand in any healthcare, except that of federal employees.  I get sick of this, the federal government is not meant to be a catch all for your needs and wants.  The federal government gets larger and states rights decrease constantly from both left and right.  If you want your State to have a public plan, fine fight for that, but don't try to push it on me or my state.  I've contacted my representative and senators. 

We're doing just fine thank you.

[ebilbob]

RESOLVED: That it is immoral to make a profit off of the sick and dying.

Therefore, the federal government and state governments of these United States have every legal right and moral obligation to involve themselves in Health Care reform, and to ensure that all Citizens receive the same quality of care regardless of their ability to pay. We live in the most prosperous nation in the history of the world; no one should ever die because they could not afford medical treatment.   

Commie!   

Seriously though, to say that making profit off of the sick and dying is immoral indicates that not only should health care be taken over, but also drug companies and hospitals.  It's a ridiculous assertion.  We have the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... after that your own your fucking own.  If a state chooses to create a public plan, then by all means that is that states, and it's peoples, choice.  New York for instance has a public option.  If my state voted for a plan tomorrow it would be acceptable, I wouldn't agree, but it would be acceptable.  The federal government on the other hand, should have no hand in any healthcare, except that of federal employees.  I get sick of this, the federal government is not meant to be a catch all for your needs and wants.  The federal government gets larger and states rights decrease constantly from both left and right.  If you want your State to have a public plan, fine fight for that, but don't try to push it on me or my state.  I've contacted my representative and senators. 

We're doing just fine thank you.

It's comforting to know that you're doing fine. A lot of people aren't. But as long as the far right keeps pretending like anyone who goes bankrupt trying to keep a family member alive deserves it because of something they must have done wrong, we can all just ignore those people, can't we?

I'm glad you at least acknowledge that the federal government has a right to act in the interest of "life." How you don't think that health care has anything to do with "life" though is beyond me.

And yes, people making a profit off of running a hospital is immoral. I think making a profit off of selling medicine is immoral as well, but I can't think of a way to keep new pharmaceutical development going if you remove the chance for insane profits. God knows those companies certainly wouldn't keep making drugs for the public good, even if they did remain solvent while doing so.

[Melissa]

Those companies have their money from the public in the form of shareholders.  Without satisfying those shareholders, further development would not be possible. 

[Melissa]

Now that the Baucus bill has passed committee, how will it be paid for?  Taxes, of course!

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55398

That estimate was based on the calculation that, if enacted, the bill would bring in $480 billion in new tax revenues and $27 billion in fees.
 
These new taxes and fees include:
 
-- $201 billion in new taxes on high-premium health care plans.
 
-- $83 billion in new taxes paid by workers who will receive less employer-sponsored coverage or lose that coverage altogether but will be compensated with higher wages or monetary benefits, which are taxable.
 
-- $23 billion in penalty fees paid by employers who do not comply with the federal insurance mandate.
 
-- $4 billion in penalty fees paid by individuals who don’t have health insurance.
 
-- $16 billion in new income and Medicare payroll tax revenue due to changes in Medicare.
 
-- $180 billion in other tax revenues items calculated by the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT).

Isn't that wonderful?  More taxation.  Just who do you think will be paying these taxes?  It isn't those the taxes are collected from.  It will ultimately be the policy owners, shareholders and consumers of products by those companies whose employees are or are not insured.

Back to the rules of wealth and taxation...

1) All wealth is held by individuals.
2) All taxes are paid by individuals.
3) There are no exceptions to the first two rules.

[watcher1]

Back to the rules of wealth and taxation...

1) All wealth is held by individuals.
2) All taxes are paid by individuals.
3) There are no exceptions to the first two rules.

Unfortunately, 5% of the people in the United States hold an estimated 95% of the wealth. Do they pay 95% of the taxes?

[Dusty1961]

Back to the rules of wealth and taxation...

1) All wealth is held by individuals.
2) All taxes are paid by individuals.
3) There are no exceptions to the first two rules.

Unfortunately, 5% of the people in the United States hold an estimated 95% of the wealth. Do they pay 95% of the taxes?

According to the CBO, in 2004 the top 5% paid 39.5% of federal taxes. The top 20% of income earners paid 63.5%. So, while those we would call "rich" don't pay 95% of the taxes, they do pay the majority.

I'm still digging for newer numbers, but here's my source for my statements:

http://www.factcheck.org/kerrys_tax_ad_literally_accurate_but_misleading.html

[watcher1]

Thanks, Dusty.  But upon further review,  the percentage of taxes paid by the wealthier seemed to decrease for the wealthier then for the poorer, under the Bush presidency.

[Dusty1961]

That's true, but everyone's taxes dropped under the Bush presidency. Anecdotally, I can tell you that the year of the first Bush tax cut was the first year since Bill Clinton took office that I got a refund, and didn't have to send a check on April 15th - and I'm by no means rich. I work for an hourly wage, and make around $30,000 a year.

If you look the table on the page I linked above, the bottom 40% of wage earners actually pay no taxes, as represented by the negative number that pertains to their share of the tax burden. Basically, that negative number means they were refunded more than they actually paid by claiming the Earned Income Tax Credit and other such deductions (I'm not saying that it's wrong to do so, I'm just stating my case.) So, by extrapolation, we can determine that the top 60% of wage earners pay all of the taxes, with the top 20% paying the vast majority. You can't really cut taxes for the bottom 40% any more than paying $0. Now you can raise the income level for a 0 tax bracket, and I'm all for that. I believe the level is at $16,000 right now - that means you pay no taxes if you earn $16,000 or less. I'd like to see that bumped up to $20,000 - $25,000 if you're a single parent.

History simply proves the point that every time taxes have been increased on those top 20%, revenue collected by the gov't has either leveled off or dropped, and every time there's been a tax cut, revenue has increased. The reasons for this are many, but basically with more money to spend or invest, people will spend it or invest it - then everyone wins.

I just don't see the gov't as being the solution to the problem. My opinion is that if you, as an individual, meet certain income criteria, and wish to join some publicly funded healthcare organization (like Medicare or some such,) then go for it. And yeah, maybe we really need to look at that income criteria and adjust it so that more of that bottom 40% qualify for it. I don't, however, think that anyone should be forced to participate in such a thing if they choose not to. I also don't think it's your responsibility to have to pay for my medical coverage. I do think there needs to be healthcare reform, but I don't think a mandatory universal single payer system is the answer. And I certainly don't think that any change that will not improve the quality of care, availability of care, or a reduction in pricing should even be considered. I think some parts of our healthcare system need to be completely gutted and rebuilt, but other parts of it need to be left alone. I just don't see the gov't being the solution to everything - more often than not, it's the gov't that's the problem in the first place.

[Melissa]

Watcher is among those who want to penalize someone with progressive taxation for achieving in their life.  I've read similar numbers from the IRS web site several months back.  It's on that site but far from easy to find.  I recall something like 35% paying no taxes at all after refundable credits are applied.