Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2  [ show all ]
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: BrAiN]
    #7428465 - 09/19/07 02:29 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Wouldn't people living longer cost the system more over time than what you would save by having more healthy people?


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: BrAiN]
    #7428508 - 09/19/07 02:38 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

"the overall HEALTH of this country will increase over time, costing everyone less."

Nothing much about alopathic medicine is preventative. It serves as band aides, supressives, and masks. Further, many pharmaceutical drugs and unnecessary surgeries, create other health problems up the road.

The only solution to health increasing and it costing less is preventive medicine. Where is that in her plan? She votes for FDA bans on alternative medicine ( were talking nutritional supplements and herbs here) used for prevention by millions of Americans.

Her plan sucks and I don't want to be forced into it, or see the Constitution get raped further and have to live under her law, in the process.

You have access to the internet and I am sure a Library in your town. Both are loaded with information on how to stay healthy and disease free through prevention.

Tell me, does her plan cover naturopaths, homeopaths, holistic practitioners, chiropractors, and massage therapy? Will it cover, herbal teas, non processed and zero trans fat natural foods?

Let's see, it seems to cover being cut open and synthetic poisons, after I become il and diseased.

No thanks!


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: Seuss]
    #7428599 - 09/19/07 03:00 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
Wouldn't people living longer cost the system more over time than what you would save by having more healthy people?




True.. I think I'm confusing my state run universal health care system arguments with this one. In this one, the companies are still profiting.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #7428605 - 09/19/07 03:01 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

I want to add something here for the people who love this plan, which is nothing more then forcing people to get her health insurance plan, and at higher rates for many.

Why is it so difficult to let it be optional?

As you start to answer that question for yourself, you will begin to see why and who is being raped by this plan.

I would love to hear from people in support of her plan, reasons why it should be forced on all and not optional for those who want in on it.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: BrAiN]
    #7428611 - 09/19/07 03:02 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Besides.. you guys can't tell me that getting a physical when you're you and and finding a disease in it's early stages ISN'T going to cost less than waiting until you're older to deal with it. That's a load of shit. EARLY DETECTION of health problems saves shitloads of money in the long run. And if everyone is covered.. that's what you'll have.. more people actually being able to afford a god damned basic PHYSICAL when they're young.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: BrAiN]
    #7428699 - 09/19/07 03:23 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

If you can't afford a physical now, how will you be able to afford having Hillary's health care premium being deducted from your pay checks?

Would you also care to take a stab at answering my question in my last reply- just for fun and discussion on it.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 12 years, 9 months
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #7428767 - 09/19/07 03:41 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

gettinjiggywithit said:
If you can't afford a physical now, how will you be able to afford having Hillary's health care premium being deducted from your pay checks?







Wait until the SHEEP get 37% cuts from their paychecks to pay for this ‘free care’.:smirk:


--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"

We have "reckless fiscal policies"

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better

Barack Obama


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #7428840 - 09/19/07 03:59 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

gettinjiggywithit said:
If you can't afford a physical now, how will you be able to afford having Hillary's health care premium being deducted from your pay checks?





By suckling the teet of the gov't. Massachussets did the same thing a year ago.. and guess what happened to the poor people who couldn't afford it? You guessed it.. the gov't flipped thier bill..

Maybe this isn't a good idea afterall. I like the idea of universal health care.. if no one profits from it...


As far as letting it be optional.. well... the gov't says we have to have car insurance.. and the whole reason is to keep premiums down. People complain about car insurance being mandatory.. but if you didn't have it... and you caused 100K in damage for an accident, you might as well kiss your life goodbye. ... and the rates for those who CHOSE to pay it would be off the charts... just look at any historical records of car insurance premiums from 20 years ago back when there were a few states that said car insurance was optional. You'll find their rates to be off the charts. Perfect example is my sister. She was insured when she was 16 in florida (20 years ago when car insurance was optional). Some redneck that chose NOT to have insurance rammed into her at 70mph and demolished both their cars. He wasn't insured so my sister's insurance had to flip the bill those who CHOSE to pay the premium.

I'm not saying it's the same thing.. but I think the idea of Universal health care or manditory isurance would have a similar underlying principal.... to save generally save money for everyone. Assuming Hillary isn't doing this because she's getting kickbacks for it, she'd be doing it because she believes ultimately it will save the average american money... at least that's why she SHOULD be doing it.

There's really no way to prove this policy will save the avg taxpayer money unless there was a previous test case in which it was successful... and guess what? There *IS*.. It's called Massachussets.

To be honest.. maybe Hillary *IS* jumping the gun.

If, in 10 years, we can prove that Massachussets' move to require health insurance of all it's citizens in turn saves the average Massachusen (sp?) money as far as taxes going to subsidies for the poor and causes premiums to go down, then wouldn't it be worth giving it a shot on the national level?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLuddite
I watch Fox News
 User Gallery

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 2,946
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: lonestar2004]
    #7429096 - 09/19/07 05:16 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: BrAiN]
    #7429118 - 09/19/07 05:21 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Remember when you use words and phrases like the "governments teet" and the "government flipping the bill", the money is really coming from working Americans having taxes deducted from their pay checks.

I'm okay with people being forced to have auto insurance to cover the OTHER guy. That's only fair to them if you caused the accident. I don't think one should be forced to cover their own cars if they choose not too.
It's understandable that if you have an auto loan, the bank can mandate you keep it insured until it's paid off. Thats the Green party voter in me.

That auto insurance example doesn't exactly equate. I can shop around for good prices AND get better pricing by having a good driving record, and by the type of car I choose to own. There is a lot of control for me to make it affordable for myself and what I choose to put at risk.

It won't work that way under Hillary care. She will decide what your premium is and the younger and healthiest will pay the most. No matter what I do to keep my personal risks low and stay healthy, I'll have to pay MORE anyway because of those who don't and aren't. It's not fair and there is zero control over choosing a plan I am willing to pay for.

I don't know much about what's happening in Massachusetts. Keep us posted.:)


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 18 days
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: lonestar2004]
    #7429205 - 09/19/07 05:45 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Fred Thompson on Hillarycare:

http://www.fred08.com/index.aspx



Phred


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #7429243 - 09/19/07 05:52 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

gettinjiggywithit said:

That auto insurance example doesn't exactly equate.





I know it doesn't. If you read that I said.. I admitted that it doesn't. But I said the primcipal is the same.. assuming politicians aren't in the health insurance industry's pocket.. they're pushing mandatory health care for the same basic reasons... that they're doing it because they feel it would cost the average american less. And that if you can prove that it costs that it lowers the cost of health care per person to have everyone covered (because people are more likely to get insured when they have more money.. i.e. OLDER and past the time where they can catch diseases early on), then maybe it should be mandatory much like car insurance.

Im not trying to equate how the car insurance is like health insurance.. I'm trying to stress how having health care being mandatory might LOWER your health bill in the long run.

Like I said.. Maybe Hilary jumped the gun. You shouldn't really press this idea on theory. Wait until we see what happens with Massachussets. If the premiums go up for Massachussets citizens LESS over 10 years than the rest of the states.. THEN maybe you'll have a better argument for trying to push it on a national level like Hillary is doing.

Or at least she could push for a mandated health insurance for CHILDREN and just start with that. If we use taxpayer money to get them started healthy when they're young.. they're probably suck less out medicare when we're older.. and who pays for MEDICARE? YOU DO!

Someone in here said "Well if they live longer than aren't we going to have to pay for them for a longer period of time". Well.. yes.. but if they're HEALTHY during this time they're not going to need their high blood pressure medication through medicare which YOU the taxpayer are already paying for. They won't need cholesterol medication when they' re older.

Point being... your tax money is going to go to someone else's health one way or another... We're already paying money that gets sent to old farts using medicare.. That' basically a universal health care system that's already in place for older people. We're paying into it and 99% of the people on this site aren't getting anything out of it. Why not just cut medicare and use that money to insure CHILDREN at least? If a kid's parents are too poor to insure him... by the time he gets his own insurance at 18 (or whenever he supports himself) and that kid COULD have had a disease prevented when he was younger for 1000 bucks... now he's going to need 100's of thousands of dollars to fight his problem. When they kid FINALLY gets insured, YOU as an insurance premium payer are going to have to pay more in premiums. If that kid lives to be an old man he's going to use pay less in insurance and use taxpayer medicare money to pay for what he needs.

If we had LESS kids in that situation, being in a healthier state of body BEFORE they can afford to get on a health plan, you won't be paying as much per month.


It all boils down to this... Pay 1000 bucks now in taxpayer money to help fight a disease in its earlier stages in a child in a family that's too poor to afford insurance, and you won't have to worry about him hopping onto YOUR health insurance carrier and using up a million bucks in medical needs 10 years later after it's too late to eliminate the disease and now he just has to live with it. If he hops onto your health insurance plan after it's too late.. who's going to pay for the millions of dollars he uses in health costs? YOU ARE! And if this kid doesn't LIVE long enough to become an adult and get his own insurance because of his disease.. he's going to end up in the hospital at one point.

Makes a little sense doesn't it? Forget the whole sympathy argument and just look at the business side. Don't you think this statement above makes just enough sense to look into?

Most hospitals CANNOT deny you EMERGENCY, LIFE SAVING services even if you DON'T have insurance. So when he's dying in a hospital because of his disease... he's STILL using up 10's of thousands of dollars in hosptal services that YOU the tax payer are paying for.. all because you didn't want to chip in two cents of taxpayer money to pay the 1000 dollars he needed to eliminate his disease when you had a chance. Even if they finally toss him out on the street because there's nothing that can be done, he's probably still going to use a few grand worth of tax payer money before he gets tossed out on the street.

Someone just needs to do some research and find out the amount of taxpayer money the average UNINSURED person STILL uses on public health services and INCLUDE the amount that the average insurance premium has increased due to paying for preventable PRE-EXISTING conditions for that people got BEFORE they hopped on your health plan... and then compare that to the tax increase you'd be paying for covering poor children... My GUESS is that you'd be paying less if you paid a little extra tax money to go towards covering the poor kids when they're young.


Edited by BrAiN (09/19/07 06:20 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: Phred]
    #7429272 - 09/19/07 05:58 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Phred said:
Fred Thompson on Hillarycare:

http://www.fred08.com/index.aspx





Did I hear this right? Hillary's plan says you have to be able to prove you have health insurance you've been paying for, before you can be hired for a job? :confused:

You broksters and rarely employed thinking Hillary is your meal ticket better look more closely at this plan.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #7429303 - 09/19/07 06:05 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

I've changed my mind. I'm only for mandatory health care IF it's for children... for the reason I stated in my last post just now.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: BrAiN]
    #7429332 - 09/19/07 06:12 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

BrAiN said:
I've changed my mind. I'm only for mandatory health care IF it's for children... for the reason I stated in my last post just now.




I'd be for that too. I already donate to Childrens Hospitals and childrens charities.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #7429365 - 09/19/07 06:21 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

gettinjiggywithit said:
Quote:

BrAiN said:
I've changed my mind. I'm only for mandatory health care IF it's for children... for the reason I stated in my last post just now.




I'd be for that too. I already donate to Childrens Hospitals and childrens charities.




Would you go a step further and be for giving welfare-type subsidies for children to get covered that come from poor families?

And i use "welfare" for lack of a better word. Welfare already has the conotation of being a hand out for lazy people. Think of it more as an INVESTMENT in getting a kid healthy so they don'y suckle YOUR wallet's teet when he/she's older.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: BrAiN]
    #7429459 - 09/19/07 06:48 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Here's the thing. "I" would be okay with it because I have a bleeding heart for children with fuck ups for parents.

I don't think it's right or fair for everyone to be forced too help other peoples kids, when they are just getting by taking care of themselves or one child.  So no, I would not vote for forced taxation to cover health care costs for all children.

The argument that they will be healthier adults if they can get free medical treatment doesn't wash for me AT ALL!

( Remember, I don't think how alopathic medicine deals with illness and disease, sets you up for greater health. Most of what they use and do, ignores the underlying cause and puts you at new risks. If you have diabetes in the family and keep eating certain fats, proteins and sugars, a doctor isn't going to keep you from getting it. Since when does a couch potato, junk food eating, fat ass parent listen to a doctor about feeding their children healthy meals and  making sure they get exercise? Alopathic docs, won't even touch, mental and emotional abuse and trauma that can lead to psychosomatically induced ilness and disease in children early or later in life.

Further, the food pyramid is crap and so is much of what is considered to be a healthy meal. Don't even get me started on the il effects of eating animal proteins and carbs together)grrrrrrrr

Anyway.......... :smile:


Charity is the fair solution to me. It let's those who want to help and can, help as much as they want too.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #7429518 - 09/19/07 07:03 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

I'm not talking about paying a bunch of money into a system that just payes people to TEACH kids about prevention.


I'm not sure about all the different types of diseases out there, but I'm sure there are a few that are just RANDOM and not PREVENTABLE, but probably have a small window of treatment.

What if the sytem just covers THESE types of health problems.. Lets say there is a type of cancer out there which if treated once discovered.... will eliminate the cancer.. but if left untreated for 5 years and THEN treated... will cause that person to have to be an invalid for the rest of their lives and cause them to suck way more out of the system over the rest of their lives than it would for the initial procedure to rid this person of the cancer.

This is the type of program I'm talking about. Eliminating stuff like that.. not encouraging kids to have a healthy lifestyle so they don't get diabetes. We already teach this crap in school.

I'm talking about directly funding these procedures with taxpayer money for children for eliminating diseases under these types of circumstances i just mentioned.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblegettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: BrAiN]
    #7429596 - 09/19/07 07:20 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

I answered that. I said though I would be okay with it, I wouldn't vote to force everyone to fund such a program via an income tax. It's not fair to me, to force people to work and pay for the health care of other peoples children.

That is why I choose to donate to childrens charities.




You confused me with the untreated children become long term invalids part.

Modern medicine is what helps create invalids, keeping those mother nature would take out, alive, yet now in need of daily care.

Speaking of, who knew that as of spring 2006, the injured vets from Iraq and Afdghanastan, requiring lifelong on going medicle treatment and care for sustained war injuries, now totals a projected cost of 2.3 trillion dollars.

I'm okay with paying for them too, even though this war is BS, vets deserve it from us.

If you want to work on prevention of long term invalid care, covered by the tax payers, help put an end to these senseless wars.
http://www.newstatesman.com/200703120024


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrAiN
Art Fag
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: Cato Scholar Comments on Hillary Clinton's Health Plan [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #7429908 - 09/19/07 08:29 PM (16 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

gettinjiggywithit said:
I answered that. I said though I would be okay with it, I wouldn't vote to force everyone to fund such a program via an income tax. It's not fair to me, to force people to work and pay for the health care of other peoples children.

That is why I choose to donate to childrens charities.




You confused me with the untreated children become long term invalids part.

Modern medicine is what helps create invalids, keeping those mother nature would take out, alive, yet now in need of daily care.

Speaking of, who knew that as of spring 2006, the injured vets from Iraq and Afdghanastan, requiring lifelong on going medicle treatment and care for sustained war injuries, now totals a projected cost of 2.3 trillion dollars.

I'm okay with paying for them too, even though this war is BS, vets deserve it from us.

If you want to work on prevention of long term invalid care, covered by the tax payers, help put an end to these senseless wars.
http://www.newstatesman.com/200703120024





Touche! did i spell that right?

I take some continuing ed courses at the comm college here. The physics dept head's office has a bumper sticker on the window that reads:

"Trillions of dollars for war? Who needs health care?"


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Why people love Hillary Clinton
( 1 2 all )
Ellis Dee 2,817 32 06/30/03 05:43 AM
by luvdemshrooms
* Hillary Clinton's Memoirs to Hit Stores (dear god) Cracka_X 816 9 04/28/03 07:52 PM
by I_Fart_Blue
* where is Hillary Clinton? lonestar2004 809 7 10/19/04 02:01 PM
by Evolving
* Jeb Bush v. Hillary Clinton Supernova 798 8 01/08/05 07:17 PM
by Vvellum
* The Irony of Clinton's Medical Situation Ancalagon 849 2 09/09/04 03:49 PM
by Phred
* Conservatives Tout Anti-Hillary Book RandalFlagg 1,190 10 06/21/05 11:29 PM
by Silversoul
* The wind at Hillary's back.
( 1 2 all )
lonestar2004 3,549 25 09/13/05 05:05 PM
by krishnamurti
* Ann Coulter: Bill Clinton "was a very good rapist" juende 2,017 15 02/18/05 08:12 PM
by Catalysis

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,458 topic views. 1 members, 5 guests and 5 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.029 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 14 queries.