Newest Numbers on Health Care as of 9/13

[Smiling Assassin27]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/123149/Co...?version=print

Still interesting, but not surprising. We can all agree that cost and rising cost of our health care plans is our biggest concern on this issue. Most of us (myself included) are even substantially concerned over the number of uninsured in America.

So the climate is ripe for support of a comprehensive reform of health care in America. But the mitigating factor to consider in this poll is that 42% polled think these current proposals would increase our health care costs (22% who think they'd go down). We're still unconvinced that our most important consideration regarding health care in America (cost) won't be adequately addressed by the bills we've seen thus far. Factor in that 80% of those who already have health care coverage are satisfied with it, in terms of quality and cost. Side note: 50% of those who do not have health insurance are STILL satisfied with the quality of care they currently receive, but like everyone else in the poll, are much less satisfied (69%) with the cost of that care.

Conclusions:You reap what you sow. Government has botched just about every major undertaking it has pursued, and Americans know this. That poor performance by government, in general, explains the mistrust and skepticism in its ability to do all that it takes to assess, devise, pass, implement, and monitor a health care plan that is efficient, effective, and fiscally responsible.

Through all this, people who point this out, via legitimate questions about the bills, engagement of their representatives, and lucid written observations about the bills, are labeled obstructionists, liars, or just plain dumb. Health care reform isn't necessarily what's being opposed--it's the health care reform that is being proposed in which promises are being made, but to the President's dismay, Americans aren't trusting because they are verifying.

[Rohirrim]

Well, we have the pre-Reagan and post-Reagan arguments. Pre-Reagan, government did all kinds of wonderful things. Won wars, built the infrastructure, freeways, Hoover Dam, funded the majority of medical and scientific research, etc. Since Reagan, everything they do is wrong. They (the famous "they") are the problem. When it comes to healthcare, I really doubt that private enterprise has done any better at it, when you get right down to it. They certainly have charged a hell of a lot more than government would. BTW, have they ever paid for the research the government produced, but they profit from? Have they paid to use the techniques military doctors have come up with on the front lines? Of course not. Scientific knowledge for the betterment of mankind is distributed freely, isn't it? Somebody sure has gotten rich off the suffering of Americans. I'm still trying to figure out how Humana could go from earning $90 million in profit in 1990 to $834 million in 2001. I could understand if they were selling a product, like software or oil, but health insurance? What did they do, other than become a Medicare Advantage provider and start sucking on the government teat?

Personally, some of the best care I ever got was from a navy surgeon in a Naval hospital. I have had much lesser experiences going to private health care. In fact, I would probably be dead right now if we hadn't switched from Kaiser to Blue Cross. Kaiser refused to follow up on some tests I needed. We switched over to Blue Cross through my wife's employer and they paid for the tests so now I'm okay. I got the treatment I needed. I'm sure there are millions of stories like that. Of course, if I had Medicare, it would have been covered anyway. These blanket statements about "government this" and "private sector this" are simplistic.

And how can we trust the polls? The health care industry is spending millions per day to scare Americans, especially the elderly, with misinformation. Nobody can dispute this. They've done it every time the subject has come up for fifty years. Scare tactics. Hell, if you were clearing $834 million a year, wouldn't you invest a little in keeping your gravy train going? They scare the American people into shutting up. They cower them. The only thing that will change a rightwingers' tune on health care is when it is they who get the long term illness. When it is they who get their policy cancelled. When they are the ones who lose their jobs and their insurance and then get sick and lose their houses, and then maybe their lives as well. Until then, they remain the tools of an industry that profits on the pain of other suffering Americans whose plight they simply ignore. Right wingers always think the safety net is a socialist plot, until they need it.

[Bronx33]

Originally Posted by Smiling Assassin27

http://www.gallup.com/poll/123149/Co...?version=print

Still interesting, but not surprising. We can all agree that cost and rising cost of our health care plans is our biggest concern on this issue. Most of us (myself included) are even substantially concerned over the number of uninsured in America.

So the climate is ripe for support of a comprehensive reform of health care in America. But the mitigating factor to consider in this poll is that 42% polled think these current proposals would increase our health care costs (22% who think they'd go down). We're still unconvinced that our most important consideration regarding health care in America (cost) won't be adequately addressed by the bills we've seen thus far. Factor in that 80% of those who already have health care coverage are satisfied with it, in terms of quality and cost. Side note: 50% of those who do not have health insurance are STILL satisfied with the quality of care they currently receive, but like everyone else in the poll, are much less satisfied (69%) with the cost of that care.

Conclusions:You reap what you sow. Government has botched just about every major undertaking it has pursued, and Americans know this. That poor performance by government, in general, explains the mistrust and skepticism in its ability to do all that it takes to assess, devise, pass, implement, and monitor a health care plan that is efficient, effective, and fiscally responsible.

Through all this, people who point this out, via legitimate questions about the bills, engagement of their representatives, and lucid written observations about the bills, are labeled obstructionists, liars, or just plain dumb. Health care reform isn't necessarily what's being opposed--it's the health care reform that is being proposed in which promises are being made, but to the President's dismay, Americans aren't trusting because they are verifying.

This is the major driving force behind majority of folks that don't agree with obamas healthcare proposal dems can say whatever they want and label people unfairly all while showing it's true colors, there are problems with the bill the way it's written and people are starting to see this but is obama willing to listen to the people.

[Smiling Assassin27]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Well, we have the pre-Reagan and post-Reagan arguments. Pre-Reagan, government did all kinds of wonderful things. Won wars, built the infrastructure, freeways, Hoover Dam, funded the majority of medical and scientific research, etc. Since Reagan, everything they do is wrong. They (the famous "they") are the problem. When it comes to healthcare, I really doubt that private enterprise has done any better at it, when you get right down to it. They certainly have charged a hell of a lot more than government would. BTW, have they ever paid for the research the government produced, but they profit from? Have they paid to use the techniques military doctors have come up with on the front lines? Of course not. Scientific knowledge for the betterment of mankind is distributed freely, isn't it? Somebody sure has gotten rich off the suffering of Americans. I'm still trying to figure out how Humana could go from earning $90 million in profit in 1990 to $834 million in 2001. I could understand if they were selling a product, like software or oil, but health insurance? What did they do, other than become a Medicare Advantage provider and start sucking on the government teat?

Personally, some of the best care I ever got was from a navy surgeon in a Naval hospital. I have had much lesser experiences going to private health care. In fact, I would probably be dead right now if we hadn't switched from Kaiser to Blue Cross. Kaiser refused to follow up on some tests I needed. We switched over to Blue Cross through my wife's employer and they paid for the tests so now I'm okay. I got the treatment I needed. I'm sure there are millions of stories like that. Of course, if I had Medicare, it would have been covered anyway. These blanket statements about "government this" and "private sector this" are simplistic.

And how can we trust the polls? The health care industry is spending millions per day to scare Americans, especially the elderly, with misinformation. Nobody can dispute this. They've done it every time the subject has come up for fifty years. Scare tactics. They scare the American people into shutting up. They cower them. The only thing that will change a rightwingers' tune on health care is when it is they who get the long term illness. When it is they who get their policy cancelled. When they are the ones who lose their jobs and their insurance and then get sick and lose their houses, and then maybe their lives as well. Until then, they remain the tools of an industry that profits on the pain of other suffering Americans whose plight they simply ignore. Right wingers always think the safety net is a socialist plot, until they need it.

Don't forget AARP--blowing smoke up their members' arses for the potential windfall of the new Obama plan. Don't forget our president distorting, twisting, and flat out lying about what will and won't be part of the plan(s). Then there's Congress--Pelosi, Reid, et al, who have their fingers in their ears so as not to have to listen to the information their constituents are providing them (probably a lot like the info in this poll..).

All those wonderful things government did are now being looked at through a prism that is more realistic. Government will ALWAYS win wars, that's its fundamental responsibility. Regarding infrastructure (dams, roads, etc.), there is a better than decent argument that states ought to handle this, but building infrastructure is a reasonable duty to leave to the Federal government. Health care? NOT. Welfare? NOT. Those are not provided for in the Constitution, but that's another battle for another day. Whether private industry can do a better job or not is irrelevant. If we have to pay another trillion for a government run program that is not substantially better than the private-public mess we have now, then it is a bad investment. The magnitude of this virtually eliminates the ability to backtrack should it fail miserably. This is why incremental reform, on this issue at least, ought to be considered, but in NO WAY should this be expedited, slammed through, or worst of all, FORCED upon a population who do not want it--even if we are all ignorant, dumb, bible thumpin' gun clingers.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Smiling Assassin27

http://www.gallup.com/poll/123149/Co...?version=print

Conclusions:You reap what you sow. Government has botched just about every major undertaking it has pursued, and Americans know this. That poor performance by government, in general, explains the mistrust and skepticism in its ability to do all that it takes to assess, devise, pass, implement, and monitor a health care plan that is efficient, effective, and fiscally responsible.

Through all this, people who point this out, via legitimate questions about the bills, engagement of their representatives, and lucid written observations about the bills, are labeled obstructionists, liars, or just plain dumb. Health care reform isn't necessarily what's being opposed--it's the health care reform that is being proposed in which promises are being made, but to the President's dismay, Americans aren't trusting because they are verifying.

Another question that is raised is why (considering those facts) is the Pres and the admin so hell bent on doing something the majority do not want? Its always about taking power and taking over various parts of the economy. They want to change it so they can get rid of the private option. Most Dems wont publicly admit it (Barney Frank being one exception) but to create a public option flat out, or through a "trigger clause" is designed to get rid of the private healthcare option. When the president has stated that he "happened to be a proponant of the single payor healthcare universal healthcare system" to the AFO CIO before he was president, I dont believe him know when he states otherwise. Obama has stated that it would take 10 - 15 years to transition out of the private healthcare system.

Another reason to distrust these folks is that they continue to say one thing, all the while implimenting policies that will bring about an opposite effect. One reason this admin can do this, is The Ministry of Truth believes in the end game, and are willing to be owned before this Chavez like government even tells them they have to.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Smiling Assassin27

Don't forget AARP--blowing smoke up their members' arses for the potential windfall of the new Obama plan. Don't forget our president distorting, twisting, and flat out lying about what will and won't be part of the plan(s). Then there's Congress--Pelosi, Reid, et al, who have their fingers in their ears so as not to have to listen to the information their constituents are providing them (probably a lot like the info in this poll..).

All those wonderful things government did are now being looked at through a prism that is more realistic. Government will ALWAYS win wars, that's its fundamental responsibility. Regarding infrastructure (dams, roads, etc.), there is a better than decent argument that states ought to handle this, but building infrastructure is a reasonable duty to leave to the Federal government. Health care? NOT. Welfare? NOT. Those are not provided for in the Constitution, but that's another battle for another day. Whether private industry can do a better job or not is irrelevant. If we have to pay another trillion for a government run program that is not substantially better than the private-public mess we have now, then it is a bad investment. The magnitude of this virtually eliminates the ability to backtrack should it fail miserably. This is why incremental reform, on this issue at least, ought to be considered, but in NO WAY should this be expedited, slammed through, or worst of all, FORCED upon a population who do not want it--even if we are all ignorant, dumb, bible thumpin' gun clingers.

A trip to the moon wasn't provided for in the Constitution either. And I doubt if the founders would have appreciated how we evolved into being the policemen of the world either. I guarantee you they would have opposed America going to war for oil, not to mention the idea that the president can just start a war when they feel like it, oops, sorry, I meant "police action." Oh, and states handling infrastructure? I'd love to see the piece of national highway Mississippi would come up with. And I'm sure the founders would have found it odorous when politicians take their marching orders from corporations, or worse yet, just let the corporations write the legislation and then hand it in as their own, which is what the Republicans are doing right now with health care.

Hey, my solution is just to take the words out of the Medicare bill that say, "65 and over." Easy. No mandate. Not a bunch of new, convoluted bs. Everybody is covered. If you want something different, go buy it. No problemo. All insurance companies are on the open market and Medicare picks up on those who simply can't afford it. Problem solved.

[Bronx33]

bump