Because you want to have babies with me?

I have no idea. I thought you were joining the discussion. But look at how you framed the statement. It sounded to me like you are all ok with everything the government is doing now, but not so when Bush was in charge, back then the government was all evil. I see a common theme here as more people are cool with the government giving them more free shit as long as someone else is paying for it. What eva... :rolleyes:

Maybe she is happy that the government is making some kind of an attempt to resolve a pretty fucked up situation, whereas the Bush administration wasn't?

To me - the Healthcare debate/situation is very similar to when Clinton introduced it in 93. Conservatives run their propaganda to create fear and confusion. Clinton wasn't focused enough on this issue to make it happen.

What is diseartening is that Obama has waffled on the public option. The progressives came out and said no to Obama on this-- which was the appropriate response. True reform cannot happen without a gov't run system.

The conservatives for over 40+ years have had a bull's eye on rolling back the New Deal at all costs. They have chaged the tax system - so the rich get richer. Remeber privatize Social Security? They have continually deregulated since the the time of Regan. Why do you think the middle class was fooled into believing that they could afford a 350,000 home when they make 50000 a year. DEREGULATION. or maybe they believed in "Living the American Dream"- I guess.
Rich get richer again.

Is civic virtue dead or has it been dead? (To the citizens that say - why should I care about people having no health insurance?)



For those who say the government can't run anything right --I have a few friends that are veterans that go to the VA hospital for treatment and they have very minimal complaints (no one is ever happy about any system are they?). Sign a form - no money exchanged - need meds? get them in 2 days in the mail--easy. That is true "socialized" medicine in the USA. Maybe that is not efficient enough for most people?


If this does not go through will it be another in a long list of citizen complaints that assert that corporations run the USA not a government for the people by the people-----(that would be on both sides of the aisle).

Is this our last chance for "universal" healthcare?

BTW - whatever happened to reforming Caimpaign finance? Could this be needed before we have true Health Care reform? In our current system are our representatives truly held accountable to the people?

Respond to any - all - or none.

Clinton wasn't focused enough is what I meant.

Yup yup. I never said that the gov't was all evil under Bush, or that I hated everything Bush did (just most of it: No Child Left Behind, banning embryonic stem cell research, "protection of marriage" wire-tapping citizens, allowing "enhanced interrigation techniques," tax cuts for the rich...)
So yeah, I am much happier that we have more liberal gov't, now if only they prove they have integrity and backbone...

You left out the part where those people who get VA benifits actually had to give up something to get them, you that little government service thing. They didn't get them for nothing like the current plan central to the current debate. Like I said before, if they want a public plan make sure that everyone pays the same percent of income to make it happen. No one gets a pass, no matter how little or much you make, the same percent. There are lots of other problems with it but I will spare you and not repeat them all again.

You can edit your post inside a certain time frame. Etiquette says to make a note of it in the reason box. Welcome aboard. g

Adam haz a health care?

Who is Adam?

How much does your insurance company pay the doctor, though? That's the question. I'll bet it's not doctor's the "regular retail" rate, nor is it as much as Medicare pays.

92014. Medicare allowable is $111.83, of which they pay 80%, or $89.46. Medicare never pays for a refraction. Are you sure this is your business?

You do understand that most private insurance pays much more than Medicare rates don't you? Private insurance has contractual relationships with each provider or group or hospital.


Each state is different for reimbursement amounts.

Mercenary - When you said that everyone pays the same percent into the system - I had a flashback to Steve Forbes ---Flat Tax campaign.

One of the purposes of socialised medicine is to ensure that everybody gets access to healthcare regardless of their income. It equalises service, not input. A 1% tax on someone earning $20k a year, whilst it is mathematically less than a 1% tax on someone earning $200k a year, has a far greater impact on that person's finances: they're the ones on the breadline; the ones struggling to put food on their family's table and the ones with the least capacity to borrow in times of trouble. The lower the earnings, the less surplus there is to tax.

Taking larger contributions from people who are earning larger incomes goes some way to equalising the impact of the cost of healthcare. If you equalise the contributons by some kind of flat tax approach, then you are taking from the wealthy man's surplus and the poor man's food cupboard.

I'm not a doctor, and I don't play one on television. But I do work in an ophthalmologist's office, and work with insurance programs every day.