We've Lost...

[Arthur Dent]

Just because you exist or have a job, it doesn't entitle you to healthcare.

Touche.

 

[BigMatt]

Bsack to the topic...

I don't understand the disappointment either. Many of us here knew this was going to happen.

So you didn't hope that things would change? I know you "knew" this would happen, but you didn't hope that it wouldn't?

 

[TiminMishawaka]

UPDATE! WE HAVE NOT LOST!
THE HILL REPORTED THIS INCORRECTLY!

This article was based on an article in The Hill that was reported COMPLETELY wrong and was corrected by Mr. Cantor's office and later corrected at The Hill.

From The Hill:

"Editor's note: This article was changed at 1:57 p.m.. The Hill incorrectly reported in the initial version that Cantor wants to keep certain provisions of the healthcare law intact. The article was revised to emphasize that Cantor and House Republicans are pursuing a full repeal of healthcare reform while addressing issues in the law, such as pre-existing conditions and allowing young people to stay on their parents' insurance plan, in their replacement bill. Both provisions are in current law, but Republicans would deal with them differently than Democrats did in the bill that passed earlier this year."

And here's the article again with the corrections:

Rep. Cantor: Popular parts of health law will be tackled in GOP repeal plan - The Hill's Healthwatch

 

[hornadylnl]

Bsack to the topic...



So you didn't hope that things would change? I know you "knew" this would happen, but you didn't hope that it wouldn't?

Someone once said hell is the impossibility of reason. Washington DC is the capital there as well.

Who is John Galt?

 

[jrogers]

Maybe some day we'll have health care on par with that of other first world nations, but it won't happen until people stop shrieking "SOCIALISM!" and decide to band together for the good of the people rather than that of the insurance giants.

Who is John Galt?

Part of the problem.

 

[hornadylnl]

but it won't happen until people stop shrieking "SOCIALISM!" .

if the shoe fits

Part of the problem.

No, the moochers are the problem.

 

[jrogers]

if the shoe fits

No, the moochers are the problem.

Some of us care about the well-being of our fellow humans. Others are too preoccupied with the fear that someone, somewhere might get something they didn't pay for that they don't notice big business buying government and robbing us blind.

Keep fighting the good fight; they'll keep bleeding us dry.

 

[hornadylnl]

You're free to donate your own time and money to help those less fortunate. That would be a noble thing to do. Helping the less fortunate with others time and money is not.

 

[rambone]

 

[Eddie]

Some of us care about the well-being of our fellow humans. Others are too preoccupied with the fear that someone, somewhere might get something they didn't pay for that they don't notice big business buying government and robbing us blind.

Keep fighting the good fight; they'll keep bleeding us dry.

I agree with Hornady on this. Donate your own time and money if this issue is important to you. Forcibly taking money and goods from the people that produced them and redistributing that wealth "for the good of society" is socialism. No thank you.

 

[BigMatt]

I agree with Hornady on this. Donate your own time and money if this issue is important to you. Forcibly taking money and goods from the people that produced them and redistributing that wealth "for the good of society" is socialism. No thank you.

Agreed. I like to call it tyranny.

 

[ATOMonkey]

They aren't getting their school loans paid for free. They have to actually work for it.

Nursing homes SHOULD be held accountable to the families but they are able to avoid that often enough for it to be a problem.

Prohibiting reduction in retiree benefits is bad how?

Lifetime maximums are an out for the insurance company. If you get sick and use up the maximum benefit you're hosed. Being in business doesn't entitle them to make money off everybody. Going into business is a gamble, which involves the potential for loss.

I'm quite baffled why health insurance companies are against the healthcare bill. With 340+ million guaranteed customers how can they lose?

When you recieve money from the government you're taking it from someone else by force. I don't care if you're giving your labor to the government, it still doesn't entitle you to take money from others. If you want my money, do something for me, not someone else.

Nursing homes aren't held accountable, because people are lazy and cheap. Not because there is some kind of glass ceiling preventing people from protecting grandpa from abuse.

Prohibiting reduction in benefits is bad because it is being FORCED onto insurance companies. Retirees will have reduced benefits or be dropped entirely because it becomes too costly to insure their health. If they wanted to pay higher premiums to go along with the higher cost to insure them, they can do that.

Business is not entitled to profit, unless you're too big to fail and get a free loan from Uncle Sugar. However, most businesses are not, and if business doesn't make profit, they close the doors. If each American citizen costs $100/month to insure and the government say you can only charge $75/month, what is the point of being in business?

If you don't want a policy with a maximum payout limit, DON'T BUY ONE. Pay the extra each month for an unlimited policy.

They're against the bill because government is dictating to them how to run their business. They might even be prinicpled, but you know how evil all those business people are so that isn't likely. Even with the mandate, there is so much nebulous "shall be regulated by the Secretary" language in the bill that insurance companies could be saddled with huge losses based on how an appointed person decides to regulate them.

 

[BigMatt]

Of all of the parts of this new bill, I think that eliminating maximum benifits is the least of our worries. How many people actually exceed their maximum benefits? And those that do, really need the help. I can't see it adding that much to our overall premiums.

That having been said - I don't think it should be forced upon insurance companies either. People can buy whatever coverage they want - including unlimited maximum benefits. I wouldn't buy it, because it is a bad bet that you will need that much converage.

This bill is meant to push the private companies out of the insurance business - plain and simple. They are doing it by making the insurance companies do too much for too little. As soon as the private companies are out of the picture, they have a monopoly and can raise taxes and claim they are doing it for the common good.

 

[ghostinthewood]

I think you're making it something its not. Cantor, although very opinionated, has made it very clear he is tired of the bi partisanship and was even criticizing some of tea party politicians for stretching truths. Anyone see him on the Daily show *gasp*. Stewart was a little apprehensive but it was a good discussion.

I dont see anything wrong with being reasonable. Last election EVERYONE wanted to do something about healthcare, so I think he just just trying to get back to that. Working on a solution instead of bickering and name calling like school children.

 

[TiminMishawaka]

I think you're making it something its not. Cantor, although very opinionated, has made it very clear he is tired of the bi partisanship and was even criticizing some of tea party politicians for stretching truths. Anyone see him on the Daily show *gasp*. Stewart was a little apprehensive but it was a good discussion.

I dont see anything wrong with being reasonable. Last election EVERYONE wanted to do something about healthcare, so I think he just just trying to get back to that. Working on a solution instead of bickering and name calling like school children.

Guys, please re read the original report. This is NOT Cantor's real position. The Hill screwed up and this blogger has not corrected his blog relative to The Hill's correction.

Cantor wants to shut the healthcare bill down. Every opinion in here about what Cantor may or may have not been thinking is moot because the OP is, through no fault of his own, completely mistaken about the facts here.

 

[BigMatt]

Right, Cantor wants to shut down the health care law and introduce a new law. I thought we were all clear on that. Can a mod close this thread since the original atricle was wrong?

Thanks for the discussion guys.

 

[Randall Flagg]

This has always been a funny topic to me, for one, because we have ALWAYS paid for everyones healthcare.

I mean you really think hospitals that dont get paid for my er visit just eats those costs?

Is that why bayer costs you 12 bucks each there?

You guys are cracking me up in this thread....lol

 

[hornadylnl]

This has always been a funny topic to me, for one, because we have ALWAYS paid for everyones healthcare.

I mean you really think hospitals that dont get paid for my er visit just eats those costs?

Is that why bayer costs you 12 bucks each there?

You guys are cracking me up in this thread....lol

You are correct, we already do pay a good portion of the uninsureds care. See how much that Bayer aspirin costs when they have free reign of all levels of healthcare. These people will then be going to the doctor for every little sniffle, sneeze, hang nail, etc.