PDA

View Full Version : Obama ObamaCare Day One ..companies warning of higher health care costs


petegz28
03-25-2010, 09:36 AM
Democrats dragged themselves over the health-care finish line in part by repeating that voters would like the plan once it passed. Let's see what they think when they learn their insurance costs will jump right away.

Even before President Obama signed the bill on Tuesday, Caterpillar said it would cost the company at least $100 million more in the first year alone. Medical device maker Medtronic warned that new taxes on its products could force it to lay off a thousand workers. Now Verizon joins the roll of businesses staring at adverse consequences.

In an email titled "President Obama Signs Health Care Legislation" sent to all employees Tuesday night, the telecom giant warned that "we expect that Verizon's costs will increase in the short term." While executive vice president for human resources Marc Reed wrote that "it is difficult at this point to gauge the precise impact of this legislation," and that ObamaCare does reflect some of the company's policy priorities, the message to workers was clear: Expect changes for the worse to your health benefits as the direct result of this bill, and maybe as soon as this year.

Mr. Reed specifically cited a change in the tax treatment of retiree health benefits. When Congress created the Medicare prescription drug benefit in 2003, it included a modest tax subsidy to encourage employers to keep drug plans for retirees, rather than dumping them on the government. The Employee Benefit Research Institute says this exclusion—equal to 28% of the cost of a drug plan—will run taxpayers $665 per person next year, while the same Medicare coverage would cost $1,209.

In a $5.4 billion revenue grab, Democrats decided that this $665 fillip should be subject to the ordinary corporate income tax of 35%. Most consulting firms and independent analysts say the higher costs will induce some companies to drop drug coverage, which could affect about five million retirees and 3,500 businesses. Verizon and other large corporations warned about this outcome.

U.S. accounting laws also require businesses to immediately restate their earnings in light of the higher tax burden on their long-term retiree health liabilities. This will have a big effect on their 2010 earnings.

While the drug tax subsidy is for retirees, companies consider their benefit costs as a total package. The new bill might cause some to drop retiree coverage altogether. Others may be bound by labor contracts to retirees, but then they will find other ways to cut costs. This means raising costs or reducing coverage for other employees. So much for Mr. Obama's claim that if you like your coverage, you can keep it—even at Fortune 500 companies.

In its employee note, Verizon also warned about the 40% tax on high-end health plans, though that won't take effect until 2018. "Many of the plans that Verizon offers to employees and retirees are projected to have costs above the threshold in the legislation and will be subject to the 40 percent excise tax." These costs will start to show up soon, and, as we repeatedly argued, the tax is unlikely to drive down costs. The tax burden will simply be spread to all workers—the result of the White House's too-clever decision to tax insurers, rather than individuals.

A Verizon spokesman said the company is merely addressing employee questions about ObamaCare, not making a political statement. But these and many other changes were enabled by the support of the Business Roundtable that counts Verizon as a member. Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg's health-reform ideas are 180 degrees from Mr. Obama's, but Verizon's shareholders and 900,000 employees and retirees will still pay the price.

Businesses around the country are making the same calculations as Verizon and no doubt sending out similar messages. It's only a small measure of the destruction that will be churned out by the rewrite of health, tax, labor and welfare laws that is ObamaCare, and only the vanguard of much worse to come.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703312504575141642402986422.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_opinion

HonestChieffan
03-25-2010, 09:49 AM
The pesky facts of life seem to bedevil the left at every turn

petegz28
03-25-2010, 09:51 AM
The pesky facts of life seem to bedevil the left at every turn

Amazing how a 40% tax on medical device makers has companies like Medtronics ready to lay off 1,000 workers.

Bill Parcells
03-25-2010, 09:54 AM
The pesky facts of life seem to bedevil the left at every turn

everybody that works at verizon are millionaires..the liberals are fighting for the middle class

ROFL

petegz28
03-25-2010, 12:49 PM
And the Left falls silent......

BRC???
Orange???
Direckshun???

Where is ya'll??

HonestChieffan
03-25-2010, 01:10 PM
they are checking to get the position from the Koz

talastan
03-25-2010, 01:24 PM
And the Left falls silent......

BRC???
Orange???
Direckshun???

Where is ya'll??

Waiting for mandatory price controls from Obama/Pelosi/Reid. Ala Woodrow Wilson, and FDR.

Chief Henry
03-25-2010, 01:26 PM
I've got a nephew that works at Verizon in Cedar Rapids. He said his co workers are
VERY upset.

Mr. Kotter
03-25-2010, 01:27 PM
As if that would NOT have happened with, or without, a HC bill....duh! :rolleyes:

HonestChieffan
03-25-2010, 01:31 PM
Theres the line...Its not the fault of (enter anything Obama does), it would have happened because Bush did it.

Garcia Bronco
03-25-2010, 01:36 PM
As if that would NOT have happened with, or without, a HC bill....duh! :rolleyes:

Mine haven't gone up in 8 years. I still pay around 100 per onth including health, dental and ADD.

Chief Henry
03-25-2010, 01:38 PM
Mine haven't gone up in 8 years. I still pay around 100 per onth including health, dental and ADD.

Get ready for that to change.

talastan
03-25-2010, 01:39 PM
As if that would NOT have happened with, or without, a HC bill....duh! :rolleyes:

The question isn't whether it would've happened IMO, it is how much more or less does the HC bill now affect the change in premium costs. As far as I've seen it will increase them quite a bit over what they were already scheduled to go up to. Then Uncle Sam can begin telling the insurance companies that they can't raise their rates, resulting in eventual bankruptcy and eventual Single Payer. Brilliant plan by the lefties!! :shake:

Mr. Kotter
03-25-2010, 01:39 PM
Mine haven't gone up in 8 years. I still pay around 100 per onth including health, dental and ADD.

You, according to everything I've seen, are in a very small minority. Frankly, I have a very difficult time believing it...

mlyonsd
03-25-2010, 01:43 PM
As if that would NOT have happened with, or without, a HC bill....duh! :rolleyes:

Glad we passed the bill for nothing then.

Garcia Bronco
03-25-2010, 01:44 PM
You, according to everything I've seen, are in a very small minority. Frankly, I have a very difficult time believing it...

the other 3000 people at this company disagree. The 20,000 at my last comapny also disagree, and the 30,000 at the company before that all disagree. And those 3 companies can't be the only ones. What an amazing string of luck that is over an 8 year period.

Brainiac
03-25-2010, 01:45 PM
The liberals will never learn that things don't happen in a vaccuum. They believe that if you raise tax rates by 10%, tax revenues will increase 10%. They believe that if you double the tax rates, tax revenue will double.

They refuse to accept the fact that the productive members of society change their behavior in response to changes in the tax code that penalize the people who produce the goods and services consumed by the liberals. When you remove the incentive to produce, people produce a hell of a lot less. The Obamabots will never understand this.

If they want something, they just vote for it and it will appear by magic. It doesn't matter if it's practical or possible. They just know that it's their right to have it, and somebody damn well better give it to them.

orange
03-25-2010, 01:48 PM
the other 3000 people at this company disagree. The 20,000 at my last comapny also disagree, and the 30,000 at the company before that all disagree. And those 3 companies can't be the only ones. What an amazing string of luck that is over an 8 year period.

What about the thousands of people at Verizon who saw their benefits cut in 2005... and 2008... during that same 8 year period?

Could there be a culture of cutting benefits at Verizon?

Garcia Bronco
03-25-2010, 01:49 PM
. Frankly, I have a very difficult time believing it...

The market place has brough some interesting products to bare. My last 3 companies all had programs involving RN vists once a quarter and you have to meet health criteria and get reduced rates. So at BB&T when I was 25 they actually paid me 15 dollars a paycheck becuase of my BMI, BP, and other metrics meet certain levels.

Brainiac
03-25-2010, 01:49 PM
What about the thousands of people at Verizon who saw their benefits cut in 2005... and 2008... during that same 8 year period?

Could there be a culture of cutting benefits at Verizon?
Denial is a wonderful thing.

orange
03-25-2010, 01:51 PM
Denial is a wonderful thing.

So you're saying Verizon DIDN'T cut its benefits in 2005 and 2008? Do you have a source for that?

Garcia Bronco
03-25-2010, 01:52 PM
What about the thousands of people at Verizon who saw their benefits cut in 2005... and 2008... during that same 8 year period?

Could there be a culture of cutting benefits at Verizon?

That's between them and Verizon. No one is forcing them to work there. Plus in 2001 Verizon was deeply in debt after GTE, Vodaphone , and some other company merged to form Verizon. The also use Union Labor which has been sucking them dry. Their LEC services, LD, and commerical business have all been taking hits. Their wireless service has been doing well, but it cuts into all those other areas.

Mr. Kotter
03-25-2010, 01:53 PM
the other 3000 people at this company disagree. The 20,000 at my last comapny also disagree, and the 30,000 at the company before that all disagree. And those 3 companies can't be the only ones. What an amazing string of luck that is over an 8 year period.


Uh-huh. How about a link so we can verify your companie's extraordinary ability to defy the overwhelming norm for most Americans over the past 15-20 years?

:shrug:

CoMoChief
03-25-2010, 01:53 PM
As if that would NOT have happened with, or without, a HC bill....duh! :rolleyes:

ROFL are you ****ing retarded?

Everyone that has a fuckin brain has been saying this way going to happen.

Kotter's response: "Well it was going to happen anyway" <==== ROFL

Brainiac
03-25-2010, 01:54 PM
So you're saying Verizon DIDN'T cut its benefits in 2005 and 2008? Do you have a source for that?
No, I'm saying that you are obviously in denial regarding the unintended side effects of the health care bill. When companies announce that they are going to make changes in direct response to the additional burdens being placed on them, you immediately suggest that the companies are not telling the truth without knowing one way or the other.

BigRedChief
03-25-2010, 01:54 PM
Who ever said if you pass this heath care reform bill costs won't go up?

orange
03-25-2010, 01:54 PM
That's between them and Verizon.

But I'm supposed to pitch a fit about this announcement by Verizon that Verizon after Obamacare will be the same Verizon as Verizon before Obamacare?

I'm guessing you can guess my answer.

HonestChieffan
03-25-2010, 01:55 PM
This looks like a culture of employee hate to me:

FINANCIAL REWARDS
Competitive salaries
Incentives based on individual and company performance
401(k) savings plan with excellent company matching contributions
Corporate discounts for attractions and key vendors (travel, technology, and gifts)

HEALTH AND WELL-BEING
Medical, including prescription drug and vision care
Dental
Health and dependent care spending accounts
Life and AD&D insurance for employees and family members
Disability
Long-term care insurance
Fitness centers at some locations

WORK/LIFE
Paid vacation
Personal days
Holidays
Flexible scheduling
Commuter spending accounts

FAMILY
Employee assistance
Adoption assistance
Home and auto Insurance

EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Tuition assistance for both bachelor's and master's degrees
On-the-job training
Online development tools
Training curriculums

CoMoChief
03-25-2010, 01:55 PM
Who ever said if you pass this heath care reform bill costs won't go up?

BARACK OBAMA

just in case you didn't know. AND they also think this is going to shrink the country's defecit. ROFL BULL-SHIT

HonestChieffan
03-25-2010, 01:56 PM
Who ever said if you pass this heath care reform bill costs won't go up?

Great deal isn't it? Health reform that increases cost?

Mr. Kotter
03-25-2010, 01:57 PM
Everyone that has a ****in brain has been saying this way going to happen.



Including me. Everyone knew there would be short-term increases. The difference is, over time those increases for many....will be less than under the current system. Guess we'll see. And if it doesn't happen....I suspect we'll see this thing tweaked.

BigRedChief
03-25-2010, 02:00 PM
BARACK OBAMA

just in case you didn't know. AND they also think this is going to shrink the country's defecit. ROFL BULL-SHITBS. No one said costs wouldn't go up. The point was for them to go up less, not at all.

orange
03-25-2010, 02:03 PM
This looks like a culture of employee hate to me:


You forgot the link: http://www22.VERIZON.com/jobs/working+here/benefits/benefits.htm

I'm shocked, SHOCKED that the Verizon site touting Verizon's employee benefits doesn't mention that they've been cut twice (at least) in the last eight years! Truly!

Garcia Bronco
03-25-2010, 02:09 PM
BS. No one said costs wouldn't go up. The point was for them to go up less, not at all.

They have repeatedly said costs would go down.

BigRedChief
03-25-2010, 02:12 PM
They have repeatedly said costs would go down.You are cherry picking and editing for your own viewpoint. Yes, if we pass this bill costs will go down as compared to doing nothing. Thats what was said. No one is so stupid to think they can stop inflation and the rise of tech costs.

KC Dan
03-25-2010, 02:21 PM
You are cherry picking and editing for your own viewpoint. Yes, if we pass this bill costs will go down as compared to doing nothing. Thats what was said. No one is so stupid to think they can stop inflation and the rise of tech costs.
Proving costs go up "less" is sorta like proving "saved" jobs....You won't be able to with anything near 20% accuracy

HonestChieffan
03-25-2010, 02:23 PM
Proving costs go up "less" is sorta like proving "saved" jobs....You won't be able to with anything near 20% accuracy

Proof? They dont need proof if its from the mouth of the One.

Garcia Bronco
03-25-2010, 02:23 PM
You are cherry picking and editing for your own viewpoint. Yes, if we pass this bill costs will go down as compared to doing nothing. Thats what was said. No one is so stupid to think they can stop inflation and the rise of tech costs.

No, people in Congress, people like yourself, and Obama have repeatedly said this will reduce the deficit and lower costs.

BigRedChief
03-25-2010, 02:29 PM
Proving costs go up "less" is sorta like proving "saved" jobs....You won't be able to with anything near 20% accuracyThats just a measurment argument. Please provide me a link when Obama promised no cost increases? If you pay a $100 for something today in 10 years you will be paying $100. Or next year you will be paying $100. I'll wait....

BigRedChief
03-25-2010, 02:30 PM
No, people in Congress, people like yourself, and Obama have repeatedly said this will reduce the deficit and lower costs.as opposed to doing nothing. jeeezzz :doh!:why does it matter to you anyway? in 3 years we are going to be in a full scale shooting each other civil war anyway....

Chief Henry
03-25-2010, 02:32 PM
You are cherry picking and editing for your own viewpoint. Yes, if we pass this bill costs will go down as compared to doing nothing. Thats what was said. No one is so stupid to think they can stop inflation and the rise of tech costs.



WORDS MEAN THINGS....at least where I come from :rolleyes:

For example, awhile back we had 47 million uninsured and then shazaam it was only 30 million. How did 17 million get insurance over night ?



BTW, whats the over and under on the date when the pre-excisting benefits kick in for children ?

mlyonsd
03-25-2010, 02:32 PM
You are cherry picking and editing for your own viewpoint. Yes, if we pass this bill costs will go down as compared to doing nothing. Thats what was said. No one is so stupid to think they can stop inflation and the rise of tech costs.

Would you believe the director of WH Office of Budget and Management, Peter Orzag?


The good news is that there appear to be significant opportunities to reduce health-care costs over time without impairing the quality of care or outcomes. In health care, unlike in other sectors, higher quality currently seems to be associated with lower cost -- not the opposite.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124234365947221489.html

I suppose you could argue "over time" is relative. But there are no bones about it, the idea costs would be reduced, not slowed, was sold by the administration.

Chief Henry
03-25-2010, 02:34 PM
Thats just a measurment argument. Please provide me a link when Obama promised no cost increases? If you pay a $100 for something today in 10 years you will be paying $100. Or next year you will be paying $100. I'll wait....



How will we define success when it comes to reduced health insurance
premiums in the future ?

Garcia Bronco
03-25-2010, 02:38 PM
Uh-huh. How about a link so we can verify your companie's extraordinary ability to defy the overwhelming norm for most Americans over the past 15-20 years?

:shrug:

No I will not provide a link for you. You will have to take my word. Now if you were looking me eye-to-eye I doubt you'd call me a liar to my face. Why would I lie to you?

Garcia Bronco
03-25-2010, 02:38 PM
as opposed to doing nothing. jeeezzz :doh!:why does it matter to you anyway? in 3 years we are going to be in a full scale shooting each other civil war anyway....

Nobody said do nothing. The first step is to phase out medicaid and medicare. Get the feds out of these decisions

BigRedChief
03-25-2010, 02:39 PM
How will we define success when it comes to reduced health insurance
premiums in the future ?your guess is as good as mine.

orange
03-25-2010, 02:40 PM
Would you believe the director of WH Office of Budget and Management, Peter Orzag?

Why, yes. I would believe Peter Orzag. From your very own link http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124234365947221489.html:

Health-care costs are already so high and the power of compound interest so strong that reducing the growth rate by 1.5 percentage points per year would save substantial sums. It would reduce national health expenditures by more than $2 trillion over the next decade -- and could help to put roughly $2,500 in the pockets of the average American family every year. A slower growth rate in overall health-care spending would help to promote and sustain a slowdown in Medicare and Medicaid spending, too. If cost growth slowed by that much in the future, Medicare and Medicaid spending would reach only about 10% of GDP by 2050 -- half the level than if historical growth rates continued.
Thank you so much for confirming that the Administration's position was about reducing the growth rate of health-care costs. Welcome to our side of the argument.

BigRedChief
03-25-2010, 02:41 PM
Would you believe the director of WH Office of Budget and Management, Peter Orzag?



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124234365947221489.html

I suppose you could argue "over time" is relative. But there are no bones about it, the idea costs would be reduced, not slowed, was sold by the administration.
From the same article. Again with the cherry picking for information to buttress your position. Comeon guys knock it off. jeeezzz

Health-care costs are already so high and the power of compound interest so strong that reducing the growth rate by 1.5 percentage points per year would save substantial sums. It would reduce national health expenditures by more than $2 trillion over the next decade -- and could help to put roughly $2,500 in the pockets of the average American family every year. A slower growth rate in overall health-care spending would help to promote and sustain a slowdown in Medicare and Medicaid spending, too. If cost growth slowed by that much in the future, Medicare and Medicaid spending would reach only about 10% of GDP by 2050 -- half the level than if historical growth rates continued.

mlyonsd
03-25-2010, 02:44 PM
Why, yes. I would believe Peter Orzag. From your very own link:
Health-care costs are already so high and the power of compound interest so strong that reducing the growth rate by 1.5 percentage points per year would save substantial sums. It would reduce national health expenditures by more than $2 trillion over the next decade -- and could help to put roughly $2,500 in the pockets of the average American family every year. A slower growth rate in overall health-care spending would help to promote and sustain a slowdown in Medicare and Medicaid spending, too. If cost growth slowed by that much in the future, Medicare and Medicaid spending would reach only about 10% of GDP by 2050 -- half the level than if historical growth rates continued.
Thank you so much for confirming that the Administration's position was about reducing the growth rate of health-care costs. Welcome to our side of the argument.

Reducing health care costs are not the same as reducing growth, but I'm pretty sure you knew that before the weak attempt at deflecting what the guy actually meant.

In his eyes both are attainable.

mlyonsd
03-25-2010, 02:51 PM
One study on inpatient knee replacements found three times as many were performed on Medicare beneficiaries in Milwaukee than in Manhattan. Expenditures in the last six months of life have been shown to be nearly twice as high for Medicare patients at certain leading academic medical centers than at others -- again, with no better medical outcomes. Uwe Reinhardt, the renowned Princeton economist, put it best: "How can it be that 'the best medical care in the world' costs twice as much as 'the best medical care in the world?'"

The answer is it shouldn't. If we can move our nation toward the proven and successful practices adopted by lower-cost areas and hospitals, some economists believe health-care costs could be reduced by 30% -- or about $700 billion a year -- without compromising the quality of care.


Oops. Missed another Orzag lower cost projection.

Mr. Kotter
03-25-2010, 02:53 PM
No I will not provide a link for you. You will have to take my word. Now if you were looking me eye-to-eye I doubt you'd call me a liar to my face. Why would I lie to you?

I'm not calling you a liar; but like Reagan, I "trust but verify."

I'm from Missouri....you gotta show me. Especially when something is so counter to the prevailing "trends."

mlyonsd
03-25-2010, 03:01 PM
I personally like this one the best because I don't have to do a thing and I will save up to $2500 per year. From Obama's own website:



OBAMA-BIDEN PLAN TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE, ACCESSIBLE HEALTH CARE TO ALL


Barack Obama and Joe Biden’s plan strengthens employer–based coverage, makes insurance companies accountable and ensures patient choice of doctor and care without government interference. Under the plan, if you like your current health insurance, nothing changes, except your costs will go down by as much as $2,500 per year. If you don’t have health insurance, you will have a choice of new, affordable health insurance

options.


http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/issues/HealthCareFullPlan.pdf

Should I keep going or have you had enough?

BigRedChief
03-25-2010, 03:02 PM
I personally like this one the best because I don't have to do a thing and I will save up to $2500 per year. From Obama's own website:



http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/issues/HealthCareFullPlan.pdf


Should I keep going or have you had enough?
you haven't prove chit. Again, its talking about costs going down as compared to the costs if we do nothing.

orange
03-25-2010, 03:03 PM
Oops. Missed another Orzag lower cost projection.

The answer is it shouldn't. If we can move our nation toward the proven and successful practices adopted by lower-cost areas and hospitals, some economists believe health-care costs could be reduced by 30% -- or about $700 billion a year -- without compromising the quality of care.

This may all seem academic, but this week a stunning thing happened: Representatives from some of the most important parts of the health-care sector -- doctors, pharmaceutical companies, hospitals, insurers and medical-device manufacturers -- confirmed that major efficiency improvements in health-care are possible. They met with the president and pledged to take aggressive steps to cut the currently projected growth rate of national health-care spending by an average of 1.5 percentage points in each of the next 10 years. By making this pledge, the providers and insurers made clear that they agreed the system could remove significant costs without harming quality.

There's that GROWTH RATE once again.

So in summary - per Orzag - reduction in health-care costs is academic while reduction in the growth rate is possible.

Thanks once again for this further confirmation that the Administration's position was about reducing the growth rate of health-care costs for those too lazy to click the link, who I suppose you think will be impressed by your cherry-picked quotes.

orange
03-25-2010, 03:08 PM
I personally like this one the best because I don't have to do a thing and I will save up to $2500 per year. From Obama's own CAMPAIGN website - which only peripherally had anything to do with the final bill

And this is relevant why?

Garcia Bronco
03-25-2010, 03:16 PM
I'm not calling you a liar; but like Reagan, I "trust but verify."

I'm from Missouri....you gotta show me. Especially when something is so counter to the prevailing "trends."

Have you ever considered "prevailing trends" are a lie? Or refering to a minority of businesses.

Brainiac
03-25-2010, 03:18 PM
Who ever said if you pass this heath care reform bill costs won't go up?
Come on, BRC. If you won't stop kidding us, at least stop kidding yourself.

The consistent message from the Democrats all along has been that the health care reform bill will solve all of the current problems with health care. They told us over and over how the robber baron health insurance companies are keeping health care costs high, denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, gouging the public, and making obscene profits.

Obama consistently told us that if you already have health care insurance that nothing will change for you. Obama STILL tries to tell us that this plan is going to CUT the deficit by a trillion dollars while simultaneously providing health care to 30 million additional Americans.

We've been insisting that the numbers just don't add up, but you guys refused to listen.

So now, three days after the bill passed, when the inevitable begins to happen (as predicted by the Republicans), you suddenly start back-pedaling and saying "Well, nobody said costs won't go up".

That is as big a lie as everything else Obama and Democrats have been saying.

mlyonsd
03-25-2010, 03:22 PM
you haven't prove chit. Again, its talking about costs going down as compared to the costs if we do nothing.

Ok, since you seem to have a problem with fractions and percentages when it comes to how much income tax a person pays maybe you also have a 'which one is bigger than the other' problem.

Let's try again with a hypothetical:

$2500 - my current health care costs
-2500 - nothing changes, except your costs will go down by as much as $2,500 per year
0 - What I will pay for health care

$2500 > 0. Hence, cost to me has gone down.

CoMoChief
03-25-2010, 03:24 PM
And this is relevant why?

My guess would be that What promises Obama sold this bill on and what is actually in it are 2 different things.

Mr. Kotter
03-25-2010, 03:27 PM
Have you ever considered "prevailing trends" are a lie? Or refering to a minority of businesses.


No, because I've seen the research, the data, and the numbers that tell the story.

And I don't rely on just talk radio or FOX for my information. ;)

mlyonsd
03-25-2010, 03:29 PM
How about March 23rd, from THE MAN himself right after he signed the bill:

Now, for those of us who fought so hard for these reforms, and believe in them so deeply, I have to remind you our job is not finished. We're going to have to see to it that these reforms are administered fairly and responsibly. And this includes rooting out waste and fraud and abuse in the system. That's how we'll extend the life of Medicare and bring down health care costs for families and businesses and governments. And in fact, it is through these reforms that we achieve the biggest reduction in our long-term deficits since the Balanced Budget Act of the 1990s.


http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2010/03/obama_and_biden_remarks_on_new.html

I almost felt a thrill go up my leg on that one.

Mr. Kotter
03-25-2010, 03:30 PM
How about March 23rd, from THE MAN himself right after he signed the bill:



http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2010/03/obama_and_biden_remarks_on_new.html

I almost felt a thrill go up my leg on that one.


Over time....long term; not short term.

We baby-boomers are suppose to be above this "immediate gratification" thing, aren't we? :shrug:

:)

mlyonsd
03-25-2010, 03:30 PM
From the same speech:

And when this exchange is up and running, not only because of better bargaining power will they see their premiums reduced, will people get a better deal, but millions of people who still can't afford it are going to get tax breaks so they can afford coverage. And this represents the largest middle-class tax cut for health care in our history. (Applause.) And it's going to mean that millions of people can get health care that don't have it currently.

orange
03-25-2010, 03:32 PM
Ok, since you seem to have a problem with fractions and percentages when it comes to how much income tax a person pays maybe you also have a 'which one is bigger than the other' problem.

Let's try again with a realistic hypothetical:

$4500 - my current health care costs
-1500 - nothing changes, except your costs will go down by as much as $2,500 per year, which in English means $2500 or less
+2000 - scheduled health care increases without the Bill which you seem to be blind to

$5000 - What I will pay for health care

$4500 < $5000 hence cost to me has gone up but < $6500 not nearly as much

$5000 instead of $6500 - sounds like getting a better deal to me.

HonestChieffan
03-25-2010, 03:36 PM
Count those chickens....

Mr. Kotter
03-25-2010, 03:38 PM
Count those chickens....

Better than counting on ANOTHER 20-30 years of, on average, double-the-rate-of-inflation-for-EVERY-FRIGGIN'-THING-ELSE....

I'll take that chance. :thumb:

orange
03-25-2010, 03:38 PM
From the same speech:

And when this exchange is up and running ...

That is about the EXCHANGES - not keeping your current plan - and has nothing to do with this discussion one way or the other. Right?

patteeu
03-25-2010, 03:53 PM
The capacity for denial from the BRC/Kotter corner is amazing. This isn't just a case of health care costs continuing to rise despite the reform, it's a case of costs rising BECAUSE OF the reform. The emperor has no cloths and you people are carrying on like a couple of poofy designers at a fashion show.

Dave Lane
03-25-2010, 04:18 PM
Waaaaah

Chief Henry
03-25-2010, 04:35 PM
The capacity for denial from the BRC/Kotter corner is amazing. This isn't just a case of health care costs continuing to rise despite the reform, it's a case of costs rising BECAUSE OF the reform. The emperor has no cloths and you people are carrying on like a couple of poofy designers at a fashion show.

Bullseye

petegz28
03-25-2010, 08:32 PM
Let's try again with a realistic hypothetical:

$4500 - my current health care costs
-1500 - nothing changes, except your costs will go down by as much as $2,500 per year, which in English means $2500 or less
+2000 - scheduled health care increases without the Bill which you seem to be blind to

$5000 - What I will pay for health care

$4500 < $5000 hence cost to me has gone up but < $6500 not nearly as much

$5000 instead of $6500 - sounds like getting a better deal to me.

Yeah, costs will go down but not really. Which is why companies are saying changes are coming for the worse.

Nice argument, Orange. Not to mention your wait time to see the doctor will increase. The level of service you get will decrease. Your brand name drug prescription will cost you more.......etc, etc, etc..


but, but, but...your premiums won't go up...as much.....maybe....we hope.....but doubt it.

Iowanian
03-25-2010, 09:06 PM
BS. No one said costs wouldn't go up. The point was for them to go up less, not at all.

You're now filled to 200lbs of bullshit.

mlyonsd
03-25-2010, 09:08 PM
That is about the EXCHANGES - not keeping your current plan - and has nothing to do with this discussion one way or the other. Right?

I understand it's now time to lower expectations.

It aint going to work.

mlyonsd
03-25-2010, 09:10 PM
You're now filled to 200lbs of bullshit.

Funny, aint it, in a sick kind of way?

Ok, maybe not so much if you already have insurance and pay your bills.

Mr. Kotter
03-25-2010, 09:28 PM
The capacity for denial from the BRC/Kotter corner is amazing. This isn't just a case of health care costs continuing to rise despite the reform, it's a case of costs rising BECAUSE OF the reform. The emperor has no cloths and you people are carrying on like a couple of poofy designers at a fashion show.

So what's been their excuse for the past twenty years of double-the-rate-of-inflation-for-EVERY-FRIGGIN'-THING-ELSE....

Seriously? WTF is their excuse about that....if you want to blame future increases on the evil government...why did that happen???

:hmmm:

patteeu
03-25-2010, 09:55 PM
So what's been their excuse for the past twenty years of double-the-rate-of-inflation-for-EVERY-FRIGGIN'-THING-ELSE....

Seriously? WTF is their excuse about that....if you want to blame future increases on the evil government...why did that happen???

:hmmm:

English please. Who is this "they" you're talking about and what does it have to do with the point I just made?

Mr. Kotter
03-25-2010, 09:59 PM
English please. Who is this "they" you're talking about and what does it have to do with the point I just made?

WTH...have you turned into a retard on us? "They"....the industry, numbnutz. Insurance, and other HC companies. :rolleyes:

THEIR increases have been....mind-boggling, compared to the economy in general for the past 20 plus years.

mlyonsd
03-25-2010, 10:06 PM
WTH...have you turned into a retard on us? "They"....the industry, numbnutz. Insurance, and other HC companies. :rolleyes:

THEIR increases have been....mind-boggling, compared to the economy in general for the past 20 plus years.

The quality of health care in our country has too numnutz. Feel free to go to Cuba if you think the savings are worth it.

Mr. Kotter
03-25-2010, 10:12 PM
The quality of health care in our country has too numnutz. Feel free to go to Cuba if you think the savings are worth it.

So, you are one of the wingtard/dittoheads who've taken Rush's advice to see "Sicko" and pretend you know what the whole U.S. healthcare debate is about? I'd have never thunk it. Seriously. Eh, maybe you aren't, but your posts make me wonder...

FTR, I can't stand Moore or "Sicko" or the Cuban healthcare system; for those in the know, they'll see that strawman you are trying to build there. The bottom-line is, the US system needs fixin'.....even if Cuba and Michael Moore suck crusty goat balls. In other words, the system is not worth defending just because some of it's more prominent critics are douchebags and/or murdering dictators.

Dang it to hell.... :banghead:

BigRedChief
03-25-2010, 11:08 PM
You're now filled to 200lbs of bullshit.So I'm down to 158lbs of muscle and bone? Cool. Should I post that new # in the biggest loser thread?

Iowanian
03-25-2010, 11:10 PM
You should probably add a couple of pounds of beef to account for some Obama Cock.


Just stop pretending to be middle of the Road, You're trying to pass for a lumberjack at a logging camp while you're shopping with Elton John.

BigRedChief
03-26-2010, 07:10 AM
You should probably add a couple of pounds of beef to account for some Obama Cock.


Just stop pretending to be middle of the Road, You're trying to pass for a lumberjack at a logging camp while you're shopping with Elton John.huh? I bet we agree on 80%-90% of the issues facing us. Who ever said I was middle of the road? I have some right wing positions on some issues but middle of the road I am not. This is just more of the same marginalizing thats rampant in here. The "others" are so extreme that we don't have to consider their positions.

I've called Obama out publically and listed what he had done and called BS on him. So this BS that everything Obama does is great is just more of the marginalizing and displacement that passes for political discussion in here these days. You have a different opinion than me? Take Obama's cock out of your mouth and you will see the superiority of my position.

Iowanian
03-26-2010, 07:35 AM
Just admit that you're smitten by the man and you don't want to date any other boys, everyone else can see it, you might as well admit it. You look and boast of trivial things that you don't like, but anytime the man says anything, you scream and rush the stage like a 12 year old girl at a Jonas Brother's concert.

BigRedChief
03-26-2010, 07:46 AM
Just admit that you're smitten by the man and you don't want to date any other boys, everyone else can see it, you might as well admit it. You look and boast of trivial things that you don't like, but anytime the man says anything, you scream and rush the stage like a 12 year old girl at a Jonas Brother's concert.More marginalizing :shake:

Disagreeing on puttting 100K troops in Afhganistan and nation building is not a trivial thing.

I was on board the Obama bandwagon before the Iowa cacus when the Clinton machine was going to just steam roll to the nomination. For better or worse I "own" Obama, thats for sure.

Presidents since Teddy Roosevelt have tried to get health care reform passed. Some really good Presidents have tried and failed. He got it done. It was a frigging big deal.

The country was very wise to pick him over McCain. I still see him with a chance to be a good president. But, the jury is still out deliberating that question.

mlyonsd
03-26-2010, 07:49 AM
So, you are one of the wingtard/dittoheads who've taken Rush's advice to see "Sicko" and pretend you know what the whole U.S. healthcare debate is about? I'd have never thunk it. Seriously. Eh, maybe you aren't, but your posts make me wonder...

FTR, I can't stand Moore or "Sicko" or the Cuban healthcare system; for those in the know, they'll see that strawman you are trying to build there. The bottom-line is, the US system needs fixin'.....even if Cuba and Michael Moore suck crusty goat balls. In other words, the system is not worth defending just because some of it's more prominent critics are douchebags and/or murdering dictators.

Dang it to hell.... :banghead:

You want a utopia where you get the level of healtcare we enjoy now but don't think you should have to pay for it.

Yeah I get it.

Iowanian
03-26-2010, 07:50 AM
If you're going to sing the song, you're supposed to add the prelude.


mmm mmmmm mmmmmm Barak Hussein Obama...Mmmm mmm Mmmmmm [repeat]




I don't want to hear an F'ing word from Obama fans when your insurance rates go up in Jan.

mlyonsd
03-26-2010, 07:51 AM
I don't want to hear an F'ing word from Obama fans when your insurance rates go up in Jan.

Oh oh, now you did it. You're about to learn the very hard lesson that it was always about slowing the rise of health care costs, not stopping or reducing it.

BigRedChief
03-26-2010, 07:54 AM
Oh oh, now you did it.:LOL:
Mr. Iowaian, I expect my rates to go up just like they have every year for the last 10 years.

Iowanian
03-26-2010, 07:56 AM
Wait until the Doctors stop accepting some of these programs like to do medicaid now....because of the govt bullshit involved.

I've now heard at least 3 doctors on the radio saying they'll retire early instead of deal with this crap.

BigRedChief
03-26-2010, 08:00 AM
Wait until the Doctors stop accepting some of these programs like to do medicaid now....because of the govt bullshit involved.

I've now heard at least 3 doctors on the radio saying they'll retire early instead of deal with this crap.Cool! :clap: Don't let the door hit you on the way out. Change is hard for some people especially for those use to being treated like they are infallible.

Iowanian
03-26-2010, 08:08 AM
lets hear what you think about it when the non-producer-Americans are complaining about their waits and lack of access to treatment.

BigRedChief
03-26-2010, 08:13 AM
lets hear what you think about it when the non-producer-Americans are complaining about their waits and lack of access to treatment.ROFL Sorry the fear mongering ain't working on me. Try someone else.

I've got a co-worker who has a bad kidney stone since the 1st of March that they are going to have to operate on to remove. He is in a lot of pain. We have excellent insurance here. He has to wait until April to get in to have it removed.

So go sell your BS that the current system rocks to the dumb azz americans who believe that BS.

HonestChieffan
03-26-2010, 08:22 AM
He has to wait until April to get in to have it removed.

Why?

JohnnyV13
03-26-2010, 08:28 AM
ROFL Sorry the fear mongering ain't working on me. Try someone else.

I've got a co-worker who has a bad kidney stone since the 1st of March that they are going to have to operate on to remove. He is in a lot of pain. We have excellent insurance here. He has to wait until April to get in to have it removed.

So go sell your BS that the current system rocks to the dumb azz americans who believe that BS.

BRC and Orange, I guess the biggest thing I find hard to believe is all the supposed cost savings, when they are taxing medical devices.

Either a) they pass costs on to consumers or b) if they can't pass on costs due to market pressure or regulators, they will simply stop making the medical devices with the lowest profit margins (which are usually the older, lower tech devices, which are cheaper).

The two biggest drivers behind the long term medical care price increases has been rising costs of medical devices, machines and drugs.

So, what Obamagenius has done is to create a tax that will drive out the most cost-effective medical devices OR raise the cost. Genious!

I really despised the Bush perscription drug Medicare program, because to get the cost savings, you need to use prescription drugs from a US pharmacy. In effect, it protected the prices of US drug manufacturers rather than forcing them to face competition from their own drugs distributed at lower prices to foreign pharmacies.

Between the last two bumbling idiots in the WH, we now have 1) price protected US drug industry prices and 2) either driven the cheaper medical devices out of hte market OR increased medical device prices.

GIVE ME MORE GOVERNMENT!!!!!!

BigRedChief
03-26-2010, 08:35 AM
Why?I don't know the details. He wants it done asap but was told April 1st.

HonestChieffan
03-26-2010, 08:46 AM
He is an idiot. Either he has a moron for a doc or is just stupid. Or its really minor and they are trying to flush it.

In any case after Obama Care he will still be an idiot. And the moron docs will still be morons. Or if the approach is to flush it it will not change.

KC native
03-26-2010, 09:09 AM
You should probably add a couple of pounds of beef to account for some Obama Cock.


Just stop pretending to be middle of the Road, You're trying to pass for a lumberjack at a logging camp while you're shopping with Elton John.

Just admit that you're smitten by the man and you don't want to date any other boys, everyone else can see it, you might as well admit it. You look and boast of trivial things that you don't like, but anytime the man says anything, you scream and rush the stage like a 12 year old girl at a Jonas Brother's concert.

hehe moth to a flame

http://solar.calfinder.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/moth-to-solar-flame.jpg

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 09:27 AM
Wait until the Doctors stop accepting some of these programs like to do medicaid now....because of the govt bullshit involved.

I've now heard at least 3 doctors on the radio saying they'll retire early instead of deal with this crap.

I'll take the AMA against 3 Limbaugh fans on the radio....anyday of the week. :hmmm:

KC native
03-26-2010, 09:30 AM
the other 3000 people at this company disagree. The 20,000 at my last comapny also disagree, and the 30,000 at the company before that all disagree. And those 3 companies can't be the only ones. What an amazing string of luck that is over an 8 year period.

You are full of shit. There is no way that your premiums, co-pays, and coverage for prescriptions haven't changed in 8 years.

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 09:33 AM
... There is no way that your premiums, co-pays, and coverage for prescriptions haven't changed in 8 years.

That's why he refused to provide the link I requested... ;)

patteeu
03-26-2010, 10:00 AM
WTH...have you turned into a retard on us? "They"....the industry, numbnutz. Insurance, and other HC companies. :rolleyes:

THEIR increases have been....mind-boggling, compared to the economy in general for the past 20 plus years.

So, again, what does it have to do with my post, or was it just a random thought?

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 10:07 AM
So, again, what does it have to do with my post, or was it just a random thought?

If you would like to clarify WTH you are asking, I'll take another crack at it. :shrug:

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2010, 10:08 AM
You are full of shit. There is no way that your premiums, co-pays, and coverage for prescriptions haven't changed in 8 years.

In 2001 I paid 20 dollars for co-pays. Today its 25. Premiums have always been around 45-50 beans a pay period including health, dental, and ADD. Sorry guys. Not everyone have massive increases every year in group coverage. Looks like you bth need to re-evaluate your position to some degree.

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2010, 10:09 AM
That's why he refused to provide the link I requested... ;)

How can I provide you a link from proprietary information from a company I worked for X number of years ago? Like I said, you'll have to take my word for it. Why would I lie?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

patteeu
03-26-2010, 10:13 AM
If you would like to clarify WTH you are asking, I'll take another crack at it. :shrug:

Review posts 68 and 75. If you can think of a way that 75 makes sense as a commentary on 68 rather than as a random, tangential thought, fill me in.

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2010, 10:15 AM
Oh I guess another thing to note for KC Naive is I don't use prescription drugs. OTC is fine, and I really don't use that. I get headaches from time to time, typically because I didn't drink enough water the day before.

patteeu
03-26-2010, 10:18 AM
:LOL:
Mr. Iowaian, I expect my rates to go up just like they have every year for the last 10 years.

Well then, that explains your ecstasy over the passage of health reform legislation. :spock:

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 10:19 AM
Review posts 68 and 75. If you can think of a way that 75 makes sense as a commentary on 68 rather than as a random, tangential thought, fill me in.

It's called Socratic method. You claim future increases will be due to reform. I asked you (indirectly, but clearly) what is the reason for the extraordinary annual increases of the past 20-30 years? The implication, of course is, that the industry alone is responsible for past increases--yet you wish to blame future increases on reform. FTR, you have yet to respond--unless I missed it.

patteeu
03-26-2010, 10:22 AM
I'll take the AMA against 3 Limbaugh fans on the radio....anyday of the week. :hmmm:

Why? Do you know what percentage of doctors belong to the AMA?

patteeu
03-26-2010, 10:28 AM
It's called Socratic method. You claim future increases will be due to reform. I asked you (indirectly, but clearly) what is the reason for the extraordinary annual increases of the past 20-30 years? The implication, of course is, that the industry alone is responsible for past increases--yet you wish to blame future increases on reform. FTR, you have yet to respond--unless I missed it.

Oh I see. I should have realized that you just didn't understand the subject of the conversation.

No, I didn't claim that all future increases would be due to the reform. I pointed out that the OP article was describing specific increases that would result from the reform. These reform-caused increases would be on top of any ambient increases that would have taken place with or without the reform. I hope this helps. Now do you have a relevant comment?

KC native
03-26-2010, 10:33 AM
In 2001 I paid 20 dollars for co-pays. Today its 25. Premiums have always been around 45-50 beans a pay period including health, dental, and ADD. Sorry guys. Not everyone have massive increases every year in group coverage. Looks like you bth need to re-evaluate your position to some degree.

Wow, cognitive dissonance is alive and well. So, we've already uncovered one increase. I guarantee you that you insurance rates have gone up too. Unfortunately you a dishonest POS that can't be expected to tell the truth.

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 10:38 AM
Oh I see. I should have realized that you just didn't understand the subject of the conversation.

No, I didn't claim that all future increases would be due to the reform. I pointed out that the OP article was describing specific increases that would result from the reform. These reform-caused increases would be on top of any ambient increases that would have taken place with or without the reform. I hope this helps. Now do you have a relevant comment?

Oh I see, your poor reading comprehension is causing confusion for you, again. Your inability to be precise in your posts doesn't conceal or excuse your lame attempt to conflate inflationary causes in HC.

Nor does it conceal that increases in HC costs have been, and will continue to be, primarily a result of excessive "over-head," extravagant expenses, and mismanagement in an entirely unnecessary private bureaucracy between HC services and patients. It should not be shocking, then, that this has created an incredibly inefficient industry that makes the government look efficient by comparison.

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2010, 10:38 AM
Wow, cognitive dissonance is alive and well. So, we've already uncovered one increase. I guarantee you that you insurance rates have gone up too. Unfortunately you a dishonest POS that can't be expected to tell the truth.

Yeah...5 dollars a visit. LOL They are gouging me man. GTFOH.

You talk a bunch of shit, you seem to want to keep testing me, but you've miss the mark again. Go cry in your milk about the shit you can't afford or do, remember this though...you are in your situation because of the choices you've made. If you find yourself uphappy, cheated, slighted, or otherwise dis-satisfied, you have no one to blame but yourself.

KC native
03-26-2010, 10:42 AM
Yeah...5 dollars a visit. LOL They are gouging me man. GTFOH.

You talk a bunch of shit, you seem to want to keep testing me, but you've miss the mark again. Go cry in your milk about the shit you can't afford or do, remember this though...you are in your situation because of the choices you've made. If you find yourself uphappy, cheated, slighted, or otherwise dis-satisfied, you have no one to blame but yourself.

ROFL So, showing that you are a liar means I get a lecture about personal responsibility? I find it funny that once you've been exposed as a liar that you resort to this and back away from your claims. BTW you do realize that an increase from $20 to $25 is a 25% increase? Care to make your claim again that your costs haven't gone up more than inflation since 2001? ROFL

Edit: or the claim that your costs haven't gone up at all? ROFL

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2010, 10:56 AM
ROFL So, showing that you are a liar means I get a lecture about personal responsibility? I find it funny that once you've been exposed as a liar that you resort to this and back away from your claims. BTW you do realize that an increase from $20 to $25 is a 25% increase? Care to make your claim again that your costs haven't gone up more than inflation since 2001? ROFL

Edit: or the claim that your costs haven't gone up at all? ROFL


Oh you like to play the percentage game. Okay, you can figure out this percentage for me. Since it's a per use cost and a low amount. Lets say ten years at 12,000 (pretax dollars at 100 dollars per month with roughly 10 doctor vists (the amount is actually 5 at 25 dollars) So I have increase the the number of visits to fit your point. What percent is 50 dollars(the difference between 20 and 25 dollars on 10 visits) of 12,250 dollars?


Please continue to make inane points. You may have the last word.

KC native
03-26-2010, 10:59 AM
Oh you like to play the percentage game. Okay, you can figure out this percentage for me. Since it's a per use cost and a low amount. Lets say ten years at 12,000 (pretax dollars at 100 dollars per month with roughly 10 doctor vists (the amount is actually 5 at 25 dollars) So I have increase the the number of visits to fit your point. What percent is 50 dollars(the difference between 20 and 25 dollars on 10 visits) of 12,250 dollars?


Please continue to make inane points. You may have the last word.

It's not a game. I was simply pointing out that you are a dishonest POS. It's amusing how quickly you backed off your claims.

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 11:00 AM
Yeah...5 dollars a visit. LOL They are gouging me man. GTFOH.

You talk a bunch of shit, you seem to want to keep testing me, but you've miss the mark again. Go cry in your milk about the shit you can't afford or do, remember this though...you are in your situation because of the choices you've made. If you find yourself uphappy, cheated, slighted, or otherwise dis-satisfied, you have no one to blame but yourself.

Has it every crossed your mind that many of us who support healthcare reform are, for the most part at least, either content or even perfectly happy, with our own personal situations?

That is certainly the case for me, and for many folks I know. For many of us, it's a matter of moral obligation to provide a basic saftey net for those less fortunate than ourselves. An honest safety net--not the bastardized stupidity of cost-shifting. I realize some folks can't fathom this, but it's true.

Unfortunately, private organizations and charities cannot address the magnitude of this problem in an efficient way. In a civilized society...putting basic and preventative patient care before profit margins isn't asking for too much. This bill is a first step in that direction.

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2010, 11:01 AM
It's not a game. I was simply pointing out that you are a dishonest POS. It's amusing how quickly you backed off your claims.
Oh, well let me be clear:


My insurance premiums have not gone up in since 2001.

patteeu
03-26-2010, 11:01 AM
Oh I see, it's your poor reading comprehension causing confusion for you, again. Your inability to be precise in your posts doesn't conceal or excuse your lame attempt to conflate inflationary causes in HC.

Nor does it conceal that increases in HC costs have been, and will continue to be, primarily a result of excessive "over-head," extravagant expenses, and mismanagement in an entirely unnecessary private bureaucracy between HC services and patients. It should not be shocking, then, that this has created an incredibly inefficient industry that makes the government look efficient by comparison.

I'm going to chalk up your repeatedly unrelated posts to dumb and just move on.

KC native
03-26-2010, 11:07 AM
Oh, well let me be clear:


My insurance premiums have not gone up in since 2001.

Yea, um, you have no credibility on that claim. You've already been demonstrated to be a liar on this subject.

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2010, 11:07 AM
Yea, um, you have no credibility on that claim. You've already been demonstrated to be a liar on this subject. Okay, buddy.

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 11:09 AM
I'm going to chalk up your repeatedly unrelated posts to dumb and just move on.

Sorry you are unable to keep up. You could have bowed out before you showed your ass, but admitting that you are wrong doesn't seem to one of your strengths so I'm not surprised. Later, patty-poo.

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2010, 11:10 AM
Has it every crossed your mind that many of us who support healthcare reform are, for the most part at least, either content or even perfectly happy, with our own personal situations?

That is certainly the case for me, and for many folks I know. For many of us, it's a matter of moral obligation to provide a basic saftey net for those less fortunate than ourselves. An honest safety net--not the bastardized stupidity of cost-shifting. I realize some folks can't fathom this, but it's true.

Unfortunately, private organizations and charities cannot address the magnitude of this problem in an efficient way. In a civilized society...putting basic and preventative patient care before profit margins isn't asking for too much. This bill is a first step in that direction.

I support healthcare reform too, and as soon as it happens I will rejoice with you. There is no such thing as a saftey net. You can't save everyone and maybe not anyone. So why punish those that can make it on their own?

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 11:17 AM
I support healthcare reform too, and as soon as it happens I will rejoice with you. There is no such thing as a saftey net. You can't save everyone and maybe not anyone. So why punish those that can make it on their own?

No such thing as a safety net? Of course there is; it's been in place for over a century now. The liberarian dream of a dog-eat-dog, survival of the fittest was mercifully slain by government during the 20th century. Rest assured though, there will continue to be spirited and useful debate over the precise nature and extent of that safety net.

Your side just lost another battle, but keep fighting the war. Without your side, "my" side my just get too greedy too and really try to do what the histrionic and demagoguerous radio talk show mouth pieces on your side claim we are trying to do. If and when that happens...I'll become Benedict Arnold.

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2010, 11:27 AM
No such thing as a safety net? Of course there is; it's been in place for over a century now. The liberarian dream of a dog-eat-dog, survival of the fittest was mercifully slain by government during the 20th century. Rest assured though, there will continue to be spirited and useful debate over the precise nature and extent of that safety net.

Your side just lost another battle, but keep fighting the war. Without your side, "my" side my just get too greedy too and really try to do what the histrionic and demagoguerous radio talk show mouth pieces on your side claim we are trying to do. If and when that happens...I'll become Benedict Arnold.

That "saftey net" as you put it is like Airport Security, its an illusion. It doesn't really exist.

Iowanian
03-26-2010, 11:34 AM
I'll take the AMA against 3 Limbaugh fans on the radio....anyday of the week. :hmmm:



I don't listen to Limbaugh, but I'm not surprised to find out you'd be a fan of a free ride.

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 12:07 PM
I don't listen to Limbaugh, but I'm not surprised to find out you'd be a fan of a free ride.

I didn't say you were a Limbaugh fan, but I'd bet those 3 docs are....that or Hannity or Beck.

If you don't appreciate the idea of a safety net in society, I can understand that but we'll have to disagree then. I can live with that.

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 12:10 PM
That "saftey net" as you put it is like Airport Security, its an illusion. It doesn't really exist.

Yeah, cost-shifting by HC companies is just an illusion to right? Those aren't real dollars that HC companies keep stealing out of our wallets either, are they? Nah. Just monopoly money.

petegz28
03-26-2010, 12:12 PM
Yeah, cost-shifting by HC companies is just an illusion to right? Those aren't real dollars that HC companies keep stealing out of our wallets either, are they? Nah. Just monopoly money.

So now that we have established the $'s are real, are you ready to concede the fact that the Fed Gov will now be the thief as opposed to a private sector "for profit" company?

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 12:15 PM
So now that we have established the $'s are real, are you ready to concede the fact that the Fed Gov will now be the thief as opposed to a private sector "for profit" company?

Better a thief that is accountable than ones that are not.

petegz28
03-26-2010, 12:19 PM
Better a thief that is accountable than ones that are not.

OMFG!! Dude, you have officially gone off the fucking deep end. The Fed Gov held accountable???? That's the funniest thing I have heard in a long, long time. LMAO


Thanks, I needed the chuckle on a Friday

patteeu
03-26-2010, 02:46 PM
Yeah, cost-shifting by HC companies is just an illusion to right? Those aren't real dollars that HC companies keep stealing out of our wallets either, are they? Nah. Just monopoly money.

Looters like you have a backward sense of what "stealing" is. Those health care companies don't take any money from you that you haven't explicitly agreed to give.

CoMoChief
03-26-2010, 02:49 PM
Better a thief that is accountable than ones that are not.

You're a god damn socialist. It's that simple.

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 02:51 PM
Looters like you have a backward sense of what "stealing" is. Those health care companies don't take any money from you that you haven't explicitly agreed to give.

Yeah, I remember now; I know precisely how much each HC service and item my family buys before I "buy" it....including the portion of proceeds that goes to cost-shifting to pay for the real looters. It's all crystal clear and upfront. Yep. Sorry I forgot about that part. I guess I lost my head.

:rolleyes:

BigChiefFan
03-26-2010, 02:52 PM
Look at medicare and medicaid and now we want to hand it ALL OVER to them? How about the VA? Walter Reed, ring any bells? We must take a stand, against this lawlessness.

Mr. Kotter
03-26-2010, 02:52 PM
You're a god damn socialist. It's that simple.

Okay Mr. Adolf Mussolini. Would you like your brown shirt starched today? :shrug:

patteeu
03-26-2010, 04:55 PM
Yeah, I remember now; I know precisely how much each HC service and item my family buys before I "buy" it....including the portion of proceeds that goes to cost-shifting to pay for the real looters. It's all crystal clear and upfront. Yep. Sorry I forgot about that part. I guess I lost my head.

:rolleyes:

Don't buy a health service until you know how much it's going to cost you. It's your fault if you don't insist. Doctors and hospitals don't make this easy, but you're always free to decline service if they can't give you an upfront price. Stop whining and blaming everyone but yourself.

As for knowing the portion that goes to cost-shifting, that's no more your business than the portion of your twinkie budget that goes for buying hostess company employees their health care coverage or the portion that is used for R&D to develop the chemical-infested sugary treat of tomorrow.

BucEyedPea
03-26-2010, 05:00 PM
Okay Mr. Adolf Mussolini. Would you like your brown shirt starched today? :shrug:

Mussolini was a socialist too. Only he couldn't be open about it due to the Catholic Church's stand on communism. He wrote for a Red paper for awhile.

BucEyedPea
03-26-2010, 05:03 PM
Better a thief that is accountable than ones that are not.

Accountable? I think not. Govt has no need to be accountable when it's not using it's own money. Only private users have that incentive. There will not only be more waste BUT in ten years from now you just may be one of those to be denied care for the younger generations. This would not be the case under teh current system. Govt already has been one of the biggest deniers of health care services....now they will be the biggest.

You not getting more with this plan at all. Most likely you will be getting less at less quality too. That's the record of such systems.

BucEyedPea
03-26-2010, 05:05 PM
Has it every crossed your mind that many of us who support healthcare reform ...

Who hasn't supported healthcare reform. It's this particular bill, which is NOT reform but a back-door govt takeover.

petegz28
03-26-2010, 05:07 PM
Has it every crossed your mind that many of us who support healthcare reform are, for the most part at least, either content or even perfectly happy, with our own personal situations?

That is certainly the case for me, and for many folks I know. For many of us, it's a matter of moral obligation to provide a basic saftey net for those less fortunate than ourselves. An honest safety net--not the bastardized stupidity of cost-shifting. I realize some folks can't fathom this, but it's true.

Unfortunately, private organizations and charities cannot address the magnitude of this problem in an efficient way. In a civilized society...putting basic and preventative patient care before profit margins isn't asking for too much. This bill is a first step in that direction.

Has it ever occured to you that just because someone has a headache and wants it to go away doesn't mean they want their head cut off in the process???

BucEyedPea
03-26-2010, 05:07 PM
It's called Socratic method. You claim future increases will be due to reform. I asked you (indirectly, but clearly) what is the reason for the extraordinary annual increases of the past 20-30 years?
Over a thousand govt mandates for one. Insurance passes the costs along plus those mandates increase demand. The govt is a big part of the cause of HC costs spiralling. That includes illegals getting care including filling our emergency rooms. These interventions simply did not promote the general welfare as much as wreck the healthcare insurance markets and delivery. They don't give a dayum about our welfare, they only care about their own plus control and power over the rest of us.

petegz28
03-26-2010, 05:09 PM
Over a thousand govt mandates for one. Insurance passes the costs along plus those mandates increase demand. The govt is a big part of the cause of HC costs spiralling. That includes illegals getting care including filling our emergency rooms.

Illegals and over-diagnosis for no reason other than to stay out of court.

BucEyedPea
03-26-2010, 05:11 PM
Kotter Cuba's Castro applauds Obama's HC reform. How can you say you can't stand the Cuban system. If one adds up the real costs for a trip to the doctor in govt run systems, factoring in their additional taxes, they'd find they're actually paying more, getting less quality/service or both.

BucEyedPea
03-26-2010, 05:13 PM
I'll take the AMA against 3 Limbaugh fans on the radio....anyday of the week. :hmmm:

The AMA has always been to connected to govt power....in order to maintain a healthcare monopoly by putting competition out of business. Just read how they came into being and the war they had with other non-allopathic branches of care.

petegz28
03-26-2010, 05:17 PM
The AMA has always been to connected to govt power....in order to maintain a healthcare monopoly by putting competition out of business. Just read how they came into being and the war they had with other non-allopathic branches of care.

Kotter is a teacher. 'Nuff said. No point in arguing the aspects of the private sector and real working folks with him.

patteeu
03-26-2010, 05:27 PM
Accountable? I think not. Govt has no need to be accountable when it's not using it's own money. Only private users have that incentive. There will not only be more waste BUT in ten years from now you just may be one of those to be denied care for the younger generations. This would not be the case under teh current system. Govt already has been one of the biggest deniers of health care services....now they will be the biggest.

You not getting more with this plan at all. Most likely you will be getting less at less quality too. That's the record of such systems.

He's counting on his membership in a union to get him special treatment in the new socialist order that he supports.

patteeu
03-26-2010, 05:29 PM
Kotter is a teacher. 'Nuff said. No point in arguing the aspects of the private sector and real working folks with him.

Yeah, he associates pay increases at work with raising taxes on other people so he's been conditioned to be a looter. Not that that's an excuse of course.

RJ
03-26-2010, 08:35 PM
Mine haven't gone up in 8 years. I still pay around 100 per onth including health, dental and ADD.

Then you are very fortunate. I don't recall the last year our family didn't see either an increase in cost and co-pay or a decrease in coverage.

Rigodan
03-27-2010, 12:13 AM
ROFL So, showing that you are a liar means I get a lecture about personal responsibility? I find it funny that once you've been exposed as a liar that you resort to this and back away from your claims. BTW you do realize that an increase from $20 to $25 is a 25% increase? Care to make your claim again that your costs haven't gone up more than inflation since 2001? ROFL

Edit: or the claim that your costs haven't gone up at all? ROFL

If inflation is 3% a year and it's been 9 years since he was paying $20 in 2001 then inflation should have bumped the price 30.5%...:spock:

(1.03^9=1.3047)

Brainiac
03-27-2010, 12:30 AM
If inflation is 3% a year and it's been 9 years since he was paying $20 in 2001 then inflation should have bumped the price 30.5%...:spock:

(1.03^9=1.3047)
Liberals hate it when you actually do the math and show them that their numbers don't add up.

BigRedChief
05-08-2010, 08:59 AM
Obama says health care law already helps millions

By CHARLES BABINGTON
Associated Press Writer
The Associated Press
updated 8:13 a.m. CT, Sat., May 8, 2010
<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634089212180000000');</SCRIPT>
WASHINGTON - The new health care law already is helping millions of people through tax breaks for small businesses and assistance for families with young adults, President Barack Obama said Saturday.
In his weekly radio and Internet address, Obama promoted his top domestic priority, which passed Congress with no Republican votes and continues to stir strong emotions nationwide. He acknowledged that many provisions will not take effect for years. But he said others are doing some families good now.

Some 4 million small-business owners and organizations have been told of a possible health care tax cut this year, Obama said. On June 15, some older people with high prescription drug costs will receive $250 to help fill a gap in Medicare's pharmaceutical benefits.
"Already we are seeing a health care system that holds insurance companies more accountable and gives consumers more control," the president said.

Obama said Anthem Blue Cross dropped a proposed 39 percent premium increase on Californians after his administration demanded an explanation. He said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius wrote to all states "urging them to investigate other rate hikes and stop insurance companies from gaming the system."
A new federal agency will provide grants to states with the best oversight programs, Obama said.

His administration also is drafting a "patients' bill of rights" to give consumers information about their health care choices and rights, he said.

As of September, Obama said, "the new health care law prohibits insurance companies from dropping people's coverage when they get sick and need it most."

He said his administration will urge large employers to follow several insurance companies' example of allowing people under 26 to stay on their parents' employer-provided health insurance plans starting this summer, rather than having to wait until September or later.
"Ultimately, we'll have a system that provides more control for consumers, more accountability for insurance companies and more affordable choices for uninsured Americans," Obama said.

Republicans continue to attack the new law as too costly and ineffective. They vow to make it a major issue in the November congressional elections.

A new Gallup poll found that the law's enactment has not lessened Americans' concerns about health care costs. The poll found that 61 percent worry about the costs of a serious illness or accident and 48 percent worry about normal health care costs.
___
On the Net:
Obama address: www.whitehouse.gov (http://www.whitehouse.gov)
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37034238/ns/health/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37034238/ns/health/)

go bowe
05-08-2010, 09:59 AM
Review posts 68 and 75. If you can think of a way that 75 makes sense as a commentary on 68 rather than as a random, tangential thought, fill me in.hey, what have you got against random tangential thoughts???

go bowe
05-08-2010, 10:04 AM
No such thing as a safety net? Of course there is; it's been in place for over a century now. The liberarian dream of a dog-eat-dog, survival of the fittest was mercifully slain by government during the 20th century. Rest assured though, there will continue to be spirited and useful debate over the precise nature and extent of that safety net.

Your side just lost another battle, but keep fighting the war. Without your side, "my" side my just get too greedy too and really try to do what the histrionic and demagoguerous radio talk show mouth pieces on your side claim we are trying to do. If and when that happens...I'll become Benedict Arnold.become benedict arnold?

become?

go bowe
05-08-2010, 10:31 AM
Looters like you have a backward sense of what "stealing" is. Those health care companies don't take any money from you that you haven't explicitly agreed to give.explicitly agreed to give?

that's certainly true, but the deal with buying health insurance reminds me of the gas crisis back in the 70's when price gouging at the pumps was rampant...

people explicitly agreed to pay the price of the gas, but only because the alternative was walking...

the alternative to not agreeing to the price is to have no health insurance which is a disaster waiting to happen...

banyon
05-08-2010, 10:40 AM
explicitly agreed to give?

that's certainly true, but the deal with buying health insurance reminds me of the gas crisis back in the 70's when price gouging at the pumps was rampant...

people explicitly agreed to pay the price of the gas, but only because the alternative was walking...

the alternative to not agreeing to the price is to have no health insurance which is a disaster waiting to happen...

Also, most people just get it when they get their job and the company is preselected for them. There's not really a "choice" involved.

patteeu
05-08-2010, 12:49 PM
Obama says ...

After all we've seen, I think we should stipulate that what Obama says bears very little relationship to the truth.

patteeu
05-08-2010, 01:31 PM
Also, most people just get it when they get their job and the company is preselected for them. There's not really a "choice" involved.

Nobody forces you to buy insurance (well, at least no one used to force you to buy it). People who thought the insurance product was a ripoff shouldn't have been buying it and should have been paying for their health care directly.

Looters like Kotter (and many others) think that insurance companies exist to provide more health care than those they insure can afford to buy on their own and that obviously can't be the case if we expect the insurance companies to continue to exist. People who blame health insurance executives for the high cost of cutting edge health care are living in a fantasy land.

Mr. Kotter
05-08-2010, 10:54 PM
Nobody forces you to buy insurance (well, at least no one used to force you to buy it). People who thought the insurance product was a ripoff shouldn't have been buying it and should have been paying for their health care directly.

Looters like Kotter (and many others) think that insurance companies exist to provide more health care than those they insure can afford to buy on their own and that obviously can't be the case if we expect the insurance companies to continue to exist. People who blame health insurance executives for the high cost of cutting edge health care are living in a fantasy land.

No, you got it wrong again patty; I'm absolutely 100% convinced that health insurance companies exist to provide cushy jobs and benefits for a whole lot of folks at the expense of providing quality and affordable care for hardworking Americans who are too lazy to shop around for better and more affordable coverage, or who don't understand they have that option or find that option "over-whelming." But, hey, who gives a shit...citizens are getting what they deserve; and health insurance providers keep filling an unnecessary, inefficient, and superfluous "role" that isn't a vital part of healthcare.

But as long as healthcare execs and even average "employees" are driving Escalades, vacationing in Paris, and living large on the backs of Americans too lazy/stupid/indifferent to dumping them, that makes it okay...right? :shrug:

:rockon:

patteeu
05-09-2010, 06:35 AM
No, you got it wrong again patty; I'm absolutely 100% convinced that health insurance companies exist to provide cushy jobs and benefits for a whole lot of folks at the expense of providing quality and affordable care for hardworking Americans who are too lazy to shop around for better and more affordable coverage, or who don't understand they have that option or find that option "over-whelming." But, hey, who gives a shit...citizens are getting what they deserve; and health insurance providers keep filling an unnecessary, inefficient, and superfluous "role" that isn't a vital part of healthcare.

But as long as healthcare execs and even average "employees" are driving Escalades, vacationing in Paris, and living large on the backs of Americans too lazy/stupid/indifferent to dumping them, that makes it okay...right? :shrug:

:rockon:

Even if this were true, which it's not, it would be fine by me. As long as people have the option to cut out these middlemen, there's no reason to complain about it.

I presume you're one of these lazy and stupid Americans getting fleeced by these superfluous charlatans instead of putting a little effort into finding the affordable options that you're sure are really out there, am I right?

mlyonsd
05-09-2010, 08:34 AM
No, you got it wrong again patty; I'm absolutely 100% convinced that health insurance companies exist to provide cushy jobs and benefits for a whole lot of folks at the expense of providing quality and affordable care for hardworking Americans who are too lazy to shop around for better and more affordable coverage, or who don't understand they have that option or find that option "over-whelming." But, hey, who gives a shit...citizens are getting what they deserve; and health insurance providers keep filling an unnecessary, inefficient, and superfluous "role" that isn't a vital part of healthcare.

But as long as healthcare execs and even average "employees" are driving Escalades, vacationing in Paris, and living large on the backs of Americans too lazy/stupid/indifferent to dumping them, that makes it okay...right? :shrug:

:rockon:

ROFL Holy chit. What WAS the drink of choice last night?

Average employees are driving Escalades and vacationing in Paris? OMG! Somebody call the Politiburo!

chiefzilla1501
05-09-2010, 08:57 AM
Which begs the question....
If insurance companies are starting to act more responsibly now, then why the fuck are we introducing a public option?

The goal should have been to get the private sector to act more responsibly. Not to inject massive government.

patteeu
05-09-2010, 11:54 AM
Which begs the question....
If insurance companies are starting to act more responsibly now, then why the **** are we introducing a public option?

The goal should have been to get the private sector to act more responsibly. Not to inject massive government.

I still haven't seen anyone make the case that they weren't acting responsibly before. If it's just a matter of not wanting to let them offer plans that exclude those with pre-existing conditions, that should have been a relatively minor fix and for the most part the fix had already been applied.

Brainiac
05-09-2010, 02:25 PM
No, you got it wrong again patty; I'm absolutely 100% convinced that health insurance companies exist to provide cushy jobs and benefits for a whole lot of folks at the expense of providing quality and affordable care for hardworking Americans who are too lazy to shop around for better and more affordable coverage, or who don't understand they have that option or find that option "over-whelming." But, hey, who gives a shit...citizens are getting what they deserve; and health insurance providers keep filling an unnecessary, inefficient, and superfluous "role" that isn't a vital part of healthcare.

But as long as healthcare execs and even average "employees" are driving Escalades, vacationing in Paris, and living large on the backs of Americans too lazy/stupid/indifferent to dumping them, that makes it okay...right? :shrug:

:rockon:
That makes about as much sense as saying that the teaching profession exists only to give cushy jobs to people who are too lazy to work 12 months out of the year.

Mr. Kotter
05-13-2010, 02:39 PM
That makes about as much sense as saying that the teaching profession exists only to give cushy jobs to people who are too lazy to work 12 months out of the year.

Hey, Braindead...

You haven't got the clue what the heck you are talking about...my posting here is for entertainment and escape; my work life is for real. I'm not as gifted as Rush in the entertainment end of it.....so I can't/don't rely on entertaiment and amusement to make a living. I am jealous of the dude in that respect. Heh.

I support healthcare reform, because I've watched the industry do next to nothing to address problems they been pledging to "fix" for more than two decades. They lied. Unfortunately, in the U.S. that means the government has to intervene and to prod the industry and our "free market" to do what they have refused to do. THAT puts a burr in your saddle...and of anyone else who has a cash cow in the current boondoggle of a gravy train they have enjoyed--and those beguiled by the myths of "free markets" that don't exist.

American society was built on many things....if you were to observe me in the classroom, you'd feel really stupid for being such a histrionic drama queen bitch about this whole issue. I preach rugged individualism, personal responsibililty, and the very important role of limited government, separation of powers, and checks and balances. Many colleagues jokingly (some, perhaps not jokingly) refer to me as "Rush"--as I even resemble him, minus 40-50 lbs, but plus a goatee. Those bleeding heart liberal types on the faculty who don't really know me well, consider me the wild-eyed and mad tea party type frothing at the mouth spouting reactionary conservative ideas. While I'm definitely one of the more conservative members of our staff, even the radical liberals eventually figure out that while I'm conservative on many counts....I'm pragmatic and more moderate than they imagine, and no wild eyed zealot or ideologue (you know, the right wing version the likes of which seem to dominate this place of late--and have replaced their left wing counterparts which vacated the joint once Bush left office. Heh)

As history has abundantly demonstrated there are times that require government intervention as a last resort. Ending slavery, reining in the excesses of runaway capitalism and greed in the late 1800s by monopolies, preventing gambling and greed of the type we saw during the 1920s from plunging the American economy into another Great Depression, legislating civil rights, and in a society as wealthy and prosperous as ours that we ensure basic dignity and a minimum quality of life for our citizens--even ones who (for whatever reason) would otherwise become desperate, indigent, and more likely to impose a greater burden on society when they become complete wards of the state or resort to criminal activities to survive. It also allows the more privileged among us to sleep more peacefully at night than we otherwise might. Heh.

Determining an appropriate role of the government and appropriate investment in our social safety net are a major part of what our republic wrestles with every day. The beauty of our republic is, every two and four years....we are given a chance to change our minds, and the direction of the country. FDR ended the insanity of policies during the 1920s that plunged the nation into the Great Depression; Reagan ended the excesses of a radical welfare state built on the good intentions of the war on poverty and the Great society. Obama marked a swing of the pendulum, away from the coddling of corporations and the wealthy that marked the extremes of the Reagan-Bush-Clinton(w/Republican Congress,)Bush II era. If Obama takes us too far the other direction, he'll get a smack-down....just like Clinton did in 1994. You underestimate the dumb luck/good sense of average Americans....if you truly believe the sky is falling and we are going to all become communists!!!

History is rife with examples of partisan ideologues from both sides who engage in hyperbole, histrionics, and demagoguery when the pendulum is swinging against them. Rest easy, V-J....if and when the pendulum swings too far the "other" way, you and your side will regain relevance and credibility at the table when the nation is engaged in serious discussions about real problems. Until then, you should hope that the Republicans wandering in the wilderness doesn't last as long as the 40 years it took for the Democrats to "wake-up" in 2008. That's not to say that the Dems have fixed it all....Pelosi and Reid keep trying to drag the party down. Hopefully, the rest of the party won't let that happen...and if the Republicans can get real, maybe, we can all get back to making government work again. The debate really isn't about big government or less government anymore...it is about government that works.

patteeu
05-13-2010, 02:57 PM
Kotter is melting down and going into spam mode. LOL

Mr. Kotter
05-13-2010, 03:01 PM
Kotter is melting down and going into spam mode. LOL

Might as well post that in the " Control-v" thread while you're at it. Less personalized than I'd expect from the teacher of the year.

Short break here, patty...not all of us can hang out for hours and hours. Heh.

The Mad Crapper
05-13-2010, 03:02 PM
Wow!!!

I've got FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS!!!

http://www.worldofmonopoly.com/fansite/images/money/monopoly_money_500.jpg

Brainiac
05-13-2010, 03:54 PM
I'm absolutely 100% convinced that health insurance companies exist to provide cushy jobs and benefits for a whole lot of folks at the expense of providing quality and affordable care for hardworking Americans who are too lazy to shop around for better and more affordable coverage, or who don't understand they have that option or find that option "over-whelming." But, hey, who gives a shit...citizens are getting what they deserve; and health insurance providers keep filling an unnecessary, inefficient, and superfluous "role" that isn't a vital part of healthcare.

But as long as healthcare execs and even average "employees" are driving Escalades, vacationing in Paris, and living large on the backs of Americans too lazy/stupid/indifferent to dumping them, that makes it okay...right? :shrug:

:rockon:

That makes about as much sense as saying that the teaching profession exists only to give cushy jobs to people who are too lazy to work 12 months out of the year.

Hey, Braindead...

(Extremely long and boring rant deleted).


LOL, it seems that I really struck a nerve with that one.

Face it, http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/ambiguousxtremes/welcome-back-kotter.jpg, you don't know what the hell you're talking about when you attack an entire industry and its employees in the manner that you did.

Go back to teaching your sweathogs. Maybe they'll buy your propaganda. We don't.

Mr. Kotter
05-13-2010, 05:47 PM
LOL, it seems that I really struck a nerve with that one.

Face it, http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/ambiguousxtremes/welcome-back-kotter.jpg, you don't know what the hell you're talking about when you attack an entire industry and its employees in the manner that you did.

Go back to teaching your sweathogs. Maybe they'll buy your propaganda. We don't.

The majority of teachers I know work other jobs during the summer--including me.

"Long and boring = too complicated and true to understand, so I'll just ignore the substance; because it undermines my fugged-up world view and brainwashing by right wing radio nut-jobs." [/Braindead]

Brainiac
05-14-2010, 01:28 PM
The majority of teachers I know work other jobs during the summer--including me.

"Long and boring = too complicated and true to understand, so I'll just ignore the substance; because it undermines my fugged-up world view and brainwashing by right wing radio nut-jobs." [/Braindead]
Actually, sometimes Long and boring means exactly that: way too long and way too boring. You went completely off-topic and rambled on and on and on about what a rugged individualist you are and how conservative, pragmatic, and moderate you are (you forgot to include left-wing liberal zealot). Then you went off on several other tangents where you mentioned things like slavery, gambling, greed, FDR, Reagan, Obama, Bush, Clinton, ... etc., etc., etc. I had to pop a couple of NO-DOZE just to get through it.

You were obviously offended because I took your ridiculous statement about everyone who works in the health care industry and turned it back around on you by making an equally ridiculous statement about teachers. If you're going to post ridiculous rants on an Internet forum, you might want to have a thicker skin.

Chief Henry
05-14-2010, 01:34 PM
Kotter, what classes do you teach ? Maybe you've stated it in other post or threads, I didn't see it.

Mr. Kotter
05-14-2010, 01:36 PM
Actually, sometimes Long and boring means exactly that: way too long and way too boring. You went completely off-topic and rambled on and on and on about what a rugged individualist you are and how conservative, pragmatic, and moderate you are (you forgot to include left-wing liberal zealot). Then you went off on several other tangents where you mentioned things like slavery, gambling, greed, FDR, Reagan, Obama, Bush, Clinton, ... etc., etc., etc. I had to pop a couple of NO-DOZE just to get through it.

You were obviously offended because I took your ridiculous statement about everyone who works in the health care industry and turned it back around on you by making an equally ridiculous statement about teachers. If you're going to post ridiculous rants on an Internet forum, you might want to have a thicker skin.

Again: "I'm too lazy or incapable or ignorant--or all the above, to respond in a substantive way." [/Braindead] Seems to me, you were the one originally "offended"...I merely corrected your ridiculous notion. I notice you didn't bother....

:hmmm:

Tell me then...what the fugg to you bother reading/posting here in DC, then?

The Mad Crapper
05-14-2010, 01:36 PM
Horshack. LOL

Mr. Kotter
05-14-2010, 01:37 PM
Kotter, what classes do you teach ? Maybe you've stated it in other post or threads, I didn't see it.

History/Government

go bowe
05-14-2010, 01:41 PM
History/Governmentoh be quiet you left-wing liberal zealot...

The Mad Crapper
05-14-2010, 01:43 PM
oh be quiet you left-wing liberal zealot...

He's not, really, he just likes playing devils advocate, thats his schtick.

Mr. Kotter
05-14-2010, 01:44 PM
oh be quiet you left-wing liberal zealot...

Yeah, funny how the "Rush Limbaugh" of our faculty (according to moonbats)....becomes a liberal zeaolot in here (according to the tea baggers.)

:spock:

:hmmm:

Extremist nutjob ideologues---you gotta love 'em. It's like going to the insane asylum for entertainment. Heh.

Mr. Kotter
05-14-2010, 01:45 PM
He's not, really, he just likes playing devils advocate, thats his schtick.

Exhibit "A"

LMAO

orange
05-14-2010, 01:45 PM
You were obviously offended because I took your ridiculous statement about everyone who works in the health care industry and turned it back around on you by making an equally ridiculous statement about teachers. If you're going to post ridiculous rants on an Internet forum, you might want to have a thicker skin.

You're giving yourself far too much credit, here. He wrote that as a sort of group-rebuttal and posted it in various threads where he'd been attacked.

Sorry to burst your little bubble, but all he typed out for you was two keys.

Chief Henry
05-14-2010, 02:26 PM
History/Government

Thank you

patteeu
05-14-2010, 03:15 PM
You're giving yourself far too much credit, here. He wrote that as a sort of group-rebuttal and posted it in various threads where he'd been attacked.

Sorry to burst your little bubble, but all he typed out for you was two keys.

In other words, Brainiac, Mr. Kotter is even lazier and less intellectually creative than you realized. "Long and boring" was really "long, boring, and repetitive."