Welcome to Thunderdome

Posted: **Fri Aug 14, 2009 6:33 pm**

And we want that person to be the government?

Might as well, I don't consider that to be any worse than a private bureaucrat making that decision. It's not like if you don't like what your insurance company says you can then shop around for another one; whatever the problem is it would be a pre-existing condition and most likely no insurance company would have you. In this particular instance, government would give the same results as our current setup.

Not that I'm saying government run health-care is a good idea, it's certainly not. But not for this reason; this is not a logical argument against it. It's just something to make the old people afraid.

Posted: **Fri Aug 14, 2009 6:41 pm**

I, and old people, just see t as one piece of a much larger pie. of several pies, in fact.

When the government pays for health care, they decide what health care you get.

The decide who is no longer worth keeping alive... there will be a monetary threshold that we will have no control over.

They will decide what is healthy for us... no more smoking, drinking, junk food. Fat people will cost us more. Anything bad will be deemed not good, and therefore illegal, probably justified by the interstate commerce clause, somehow. Out of shape people will go to special camps where they can learn about healthy lifestyle and concentrate on being a healthier... and therefore less expensive... American. We can call these places Concentration Camps.

To ensure only healthy food is being sold on American grocery store shelves, the government will take over all food production/service in this country by expanding the USDA. A burger from Ruby Tuesday's will now be 90% vegetable matter, and cost 3 times as much, and subsidized by tax dollars because the government will have to pay people to eat that shit.

And now the government has that much more of a grip on our freedoms.

Posted: **Fri Aug 14, 2009 6:43 pm**

GORDON wrote:
TheCatt wrote:No, the "end of life" proposals were not related to "death panels."
So... what is a panel called that decides when a person is no longer worth spending money on to prolong life?

Who cares, that's not what was in the bill.

Posted: **Fri Aug 14, 2009 6:45 pm**

TheCatt wrote:
GORDON wrote:
TheCatt wrote:No, the "end of life" proposals were not related to "death panels."
So... what is a panel called that decides when a person is no longer worth spending money on to prolong life?
Who cares, that's not what was in the bill.

You read it? You're obviously not in congress.

Posted: **Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:01 pm**

I have some lawyer friends who helped me.

Posted: **Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:46 pm**

Let's even say the gov't makes all that "bad" shyte illegal. Sugar, soda, dead animals, tobacco, booze, whatever.

How much illegal shit can people still get their hands on? Marijuana, cocaine, crack, opiates, meth, barbs, hallucinogens -- all are available at the right street corner or suburban basement.

Fuck, people might actually be paying $5 for a few rocks of real sugar before too long. Hello black market, hello creativity & innovation that comes from it. Also hello to the violence & expense involved in fighting the War on Sugar.

Posted: **Fri Aug 14, 2009 8:14 pm**

That's not freedom.

Posted: **Fri Aug 14, 2009 9:01 pm**

thibodeaux wrote:Whole Foods Hippy CEO Health Care Plan

Customers mad that CEO doesn't toe the hippie line

Posted: **Fri Aug 14, 2009 9:12 pm**

Bah, they'll be back. Every other store out there is more despicable to their silly ideals.

Posted: **Fri Aug 14, 2009 9:12 pm**

GORDON wrote:That's not freedom.

No. But if open freedom isn't going to be an option, closeted freedom is the best there is.

Posted: **Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:17 pm**

GORDON wrote:By the way, this entire thread was too see who had un-American thoughts, and you have been turned into the White House for further action.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/

There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to [email=flag@whitehouse.gov.]flag@whitehouse.gov.[/email]
Heil Obama.

Ha, I read that peeps are auto-forwarding their spam to that email account.

Posted: **Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:18 pm**

Malcolm wrote:
GORDON wrote:That's not freedom.
No. But if open freedom isn't going to be an option, closeted freedom is the best there is.

If freedom is no longer an option, perhaps it is time to look at new options.

Posted: **Sun Aug 16, 2009 8:39 pm**

Spammers have been put in jail already, right?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/16/white-house-e-mail/

Posted: **Sun Aug 16, 2009 10:03 pm**

The White House previously would not answer questions on how the e-mails landed unsolicited in so many inboxes. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on Thursday said he couldn't give an answer until he saw who received the e-mails because he doesn't have "omnipotent clarity."

I didn't realize it took divine power to sort out who sent a fucking e-mail.

Posted: **Mon Aug 17, 2009 1:58 pm**

GORDON wrote:
GORDON wrote:By the way, this entire thread was too see who had un-American thoughts, and you have been turned into the White House for further action.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/

There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to [email=flag@whitehouse.gov.]flag@whitehouse.gov.[/email]
Heil Obama.
Ha, I read that peeps are auto-forwarding their spam to that email account.

Pedal, backwards, faster!

You probably heard all about this on the evening news already, but just to reiterate:

... flag@whitehouse.gov address is now non-funcitonal. Emails bounce from there, and you get this message:

The email address you just sent a message to is no longer in service.We are now accepting your feedback about health insurance reform via:http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck

"Reality check." How hip and cool. I really feel the white house is going all out to relate to me and my generation.

Posted: **Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:15 pm**

See? Don't get worried about the gov't using worthless e-mails. This thing became moot quicker than MS's bug report inbox. The private sector techies can still run circles around the general, non-techie ideas the D.C. politicians have. As time goes on & more of them get tech savvy, then that'll be unpleasant.

Posted: **Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:37 pm**

You know, if you wanted to immediately drop medical expenses by a not insignificant percentage, there's a one-step solution. Just make it so that no medical expenses - all of them, from prceedures to supplies to devices to any tacked on fees and whatnot - can be charged at more than the lowest rate that the doctor/institution/company would accept from an insurance company. So if they have made a deal with an insurance company to accept only $70 for something that on paper they are in theory charging $200 for (I see that all the time), then all billings to all patients for that same proceedure/item/treatment must be no more than $70.

That would balance out some of the cost inflation right there. Individuals without insurance would get the same good prices that the insurance companies get (which I think increases the odds of them actually paying for it instead of defaulting). Of course most doctors would probably renegotiate their deals and raise those prices very slightly to compensate for reduced revenue from those few people that previously did pay but didn't have insurance. But that increase would be tiny overall.

On paper medical expenses in the US are huge. But I have to wonder how much of that is due to those hyper-inflated invoices that never get paid by insurance companies because they're being billed much more than they'll actually pay according to the deal they have with the doctor/institution/company?

Posted: **Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:52 pm**

TPRJones wrote: Just make it so that no medical expenses - all of them, from prceedures to supplies to devices to any tacked on fees and whatnot - can be charged at more than the lowest rate that the doctor/institution/company would accept from an insurance company.

Unless I am mistaken, the AMA sets rates across the board, which is why there are no "bargain basement" doctors in this country. This is part of the reason why the AMA monopoly on medicine is such a bad thing. The AMA will not be going away under ObamaCare.

Posted: **Mon Aug 17, 2009 4:02 pm**

Yeah, that whole situation has always seemed f****ed to me. Lab work is the same way. Labcorp billed me $300+ for some tests, insurance paid $42.

WTF?

Posted: **Mon Aug 17, 2009 4:11 pm**

If the costs being reported to the studies that track stuff is the $300+ instead of the $42, then maybe the massive costs of health-care in this country isn't anywhere near as massive as we are being led to believe.

EDIT: And at the risk of sounding like a conspiracy nut, maybe that's been a part of the plan from the beginning. Simply by cutting out those imaginary overbills, suddenly under Obama-care the cost of healthcare in the US is cuty by two-thirds overnight. It's a miracle, and anyone that says otherwise is just a racist Republican. It could be why he's pushing so hard so fast; to pull it off before anyone notices the trick.

Edited By TPRJones on 1250540044