Page 19 of 71 FirstFirst ... 914151617181920212223242969 ... LastLast
Results 361 to 380 of 1405
  1.    #361  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    Yep, the fear of the domino-effect
    Do you know how many post you have accused people of having different fears. You might seek counseling to see what fears you have hidden within you.

    McDonalds... has created more than one generation of kids with Type-2 diabetes?
    And the parent have no responsibility in making sure their kids eat right?

    I've been around longer than McDonald's and sure a Big Mac, Jumbo Fries and a Large Chocolate Shake a few times a week sounds good, but I know what would happen if I didn't take responsibility for my own diet.

    The government is NOT your parents. The government is not responsible for raising you. This cradle to grave dependence on the government needs to end. Come on TAKE SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOURSELVES!
  2.    #362  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Do you know that 80% of medical bankruptcies are in working people? Do you know that 60% of all bankruptcies are medically caused?
    This is because if they are out sick (past their sick leave time) their employer stops paying them, but the bills keep coming...not only medical bills.

    Maybe the government should require employers to offer unlimited sick leave time. Maybe we should make Disability Income policies mandatory.


    SELF RESPONSIBILITY NOW! STOP THE GOVERNMENT DEPENDENCE MADNESS!
  3. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #363  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Give me any evidence that these kind of ridiculous suggestions are being planned by anybody. Just more scare tactics.
    Newsom Promises Plan to Tax Soda | NBC Bay Area
    Sweet On A Soda Tax? - Men's Health
    The Tax Foundation - Gov. Paterson's Tax Hikes Include Ridiculous Tax on Non-Diet Soda
    Soda Tax Weighed to Pay for Health Care - WSJ.com
  4. #364  
    so who agrees with the system as it stands?

    then if you don't agree, in two sentances, state that fundamental problem you have.

    for example
    no, because my taxes pay for others care.

    no, because we don't care for everyone.

    obviously I require generalities, most would never disagree that the foundation of healthcare isn't extended to practically everyone, or that they are happy to put there money to ensure it. Of course I'm talking about clean water.

    remember used qualifiers like "most" as some would take umbridge with public water supply as valid use of there money. Only an ***** would take issue with it being called bassic to healthcare. I leave that unqualified, Snow what I mean

    yuck yuck
  5. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #365  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Do you know that 60% of all bankruptcies are medically caused?
    I don't believe that's correct. Would you mind posting your reference? If you referencing the Himmelstein and Wollhandler study, there are some big problems there.
  6. #366  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Didn't George Bush have an Ivy League degree? Yeah, I think he did. You are very proud of your Ivy League degree, having mentioned it several times. Clearly it doesn't guarantee judgement. And yes, indeed, I have a DrPH as well as an MD, and the only thing that means is that I've studied a whole lot more about health care systems than you. That doesn't mean I'm right....common sense, age and experience tells me that.
    Gee noaxis2 it now looks as though you are George Bush. You're still just a dumb Ivy Leaguer.

    You must be crushed to hear that a dr with such high self regard and obviously the best education available thinks so poorly of you. I know it just tears me up.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  7. #367  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    I don't believe that's correct. Would you mind posting your reference? If you referencing the Himmelstein and Wollhandler study, there are some big problems there.
    The problem is that there is no national collection of such data. Some of the discussion about the Harvard study is perfectly reasonable in that it raises questions about the methodology. There are no other studies or reasonable data collection except for a study that found differences between results when using two different methodologies for data collection....but these differences were expainable, and the data still show an incredible amount of medical debt:

    This paper presents original empirical evidence on financial interactions between medical providers and their patients who go bankrupt. We use a nationally representative sample of people who filed for bankruptcy in 2007 to compare two popular but hotly contested methods of measuring medical burden. By applying both methods to the same filers, we find that nearly four out of five respondents had some financial obligation for medical care not covered by insurance in the two years prior to filing, but only about half of the court records contain identifiable medical debt, and of substantially more modest amounts. We test several theories to explain the discrepancy and find we can explain it to a significant extent by filers’ methods of managing medical bills that make many bills undetectable using the court record method. For example, we find the highest rates of mortgage and credit card use for medical bills among respondents with the largest discrepancies between the two measures. Respondents who specifically report medical bills as a reason they filed for bankruptcy mortgaged their homes for medical bills at nearly four times the frequency of other filers, and were about a third more likely to use credit cards for medical bills.
    alternative methods

    Essentially, there is no excellent data, but the Harvard paper is a very reasonable starting point.

    Bankruptcies due to medical bills increased by nearly 50 percent in a six-year period, from 46 percent in 2001 to 62 percent in 2007, and most of those who filed for bankruptcy were middle-class, well-educated homeowners, according to a report that will be published in the August issue of The American Journal of Medicine.

    "Unless you're a Warren Buffett or Bill Gates, you're one illness away from financial ruin in this country," says lead author Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., of the Harvard Medical School, in Cambridge, Mass. "If an illness is long enough and expensive enough, private insurance offers very little protection against medical bankruptcy, and that's the major finding in our study."

    Woolhandler and her colleagues surveyed a random sample of 2,314 people who filed for bankruptcy in early 2007, looked at their court records, and then interviewed more than 1,000 of them. Health.com: Expert advice on getting health insurance and affordable care for chronic pain
    They concluded that 62.1 percent of the bankruptcies were medically related because the individuals either had more than $5,000 (or 10 percent of their pretax income) in medical bills, mortgaged their home to pay for medical bills, or lost significant income due to an illness. On average, medically bankrupt families had $17,943 in out-of-pocket expenses, including $26,971 for those who lacked insurance and $17,749 who had insurance at some point.
  8. #368  
    None of those references address what I requested: show me an example of any plan that refuses to provide care to people based on lifestyle changes. Nice misdirection, though.
  9. #369  
    Look, Acting like everyone who opposes this healthcare reform is some uneducated buffoon who is simply spreading fear is not only insulting, but shows a bit of intelectual snobbiness. To refute many arguments by stating that they are "slippery slope" scare tacticsis ignoring valid concerns about the power the gov't will wield once they do have control over a great percentage of people's daily lives.
    I did not have insurance in college, mainly because it was expensive. That's not to say I couldn't afford it. Being young, I just put other parts of my life ahead of buying health insurance, things that I obviously could live without. You act as if everyone without health insurance cannot afford it, and both you and I know that's not the case. No one is denying the fact that there are millions of tough cases out there. But for every sad story and harsh statistic that is rolled out, there are just as many people who simply choose not to be covered. Should I feel sorry for these people if something happens to them? I'm sorry, but no. They knew the risks, just as I did.
    In Wisconsin, there are health plans available from $60 with high deductibles, and around $100-$150 with moderate deductibles of around $2000-3000 per year. My wifehad a plan that cost her $165/month before we were married, and gave her fantastic coverage. If you are on this site, and are for Obama's healthcare proposal because you "Can't afford coverage", look at your phone, your calling plan, your internet bill, and then try to tell me again with a straight face that you can't afford it.
    True, insurance does not cover all costs. You will still have out of pocket expenses, but considering what we spend our money on, these costs can be, for the most part, taken care of. Of course there are other cases with circumstances that are beyond this. However, they are not as widespread as everyone says they are. And here in Wisconsin, every child is already covered, either by personal insurance, or by BadgerCare. The arguement that we need this plan in order to make sure all children are covered is not valid in my eyes.
    Even if you deny all of this, you still need to explain to me why I need to pay for someone elses healthcare. Where is this money going to come from? I am already being taxed higher than others, and now my taxes are going to increase because I need to help fund a public healthcare option. Can anyone explain to me why I should support this? Why is it my responsibility to shoulder the burden this plan? I have worked incredibly hard to get to where I am at life. I am apathetic to the problems many people are having, especially in this economy, but no one is holding them back from going back to school to get an education in a field that has higher demand. There are many ways to improve your lot in life. The problem is that many people are unwilling to sacrifice what we now consider "necessities" in order to get there.
  10. #370  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    When corporate welfare becomes the crutch that holds up and promotes an industry which then harms the society those corporations serve, there is no remaining room for your argument. In your mind, everyone who has illness brought it upon themselves, which tells me just how ill-informed you are where health is concerned. You're in way over your head on this subject, though that doesn't preclude you from irresponsibly crying 'Freedom!'.
    Really, this is an irresponsible statement, and I think you know it. No where does his assertion that parents should be responsible for themselves, and not blame McDonalds, does he state that this applies to all illness and disease. Using that as the basis for your statement that he is uneducated on the subject of healthcare is way off base. He is advocating personal responsibility, which is at the heart of the problems we are now having, both economically and in our current climate of government dependence by a large section of the American public.
    You may have a higher education on the subject of health care, but that does not give you the right to dismiss the opinions of others on the subject. That type of thinking is driving the sort of hatred we are seeing between both sides of this debate. There are many with the same level of education who are not in support of this plan, so I know that a further education on the subject will still not change my mind on whether or not it is incumbent upon me to fund a system that, although helpful to some, allows others to keep the status quo and avoid making sacrifices to improve there position in life.
    Last edited by morrison0880; 10/01/2009 at 08:54 AM. Reason: .
  11. #371  
    I would like to see a statistic on the percentage of Uninsured Individuals who have a Brand new vehicle or out of hand Home Mortgage. I pay for my insurance individually and I really don't think it is unreasonable. It really comes down to the individuals decisions on what they spend their money on and far too often they decide to a finance new vehicle or something of the sort. If people would just take a look in the mirror and accept responsibility for their actions they would gain self worth and a new perspective on their lives. Individuals are and will always be responsible for themselves. The sooner everyone stops expecting handouts and enabling the poor to stay poor the sooner that person and this country will be on the right track for success. I don't want to see anyone get very sick without insurance but I don't think that others will learn how important it is too pass on the risk if the government comes to the rescue. Failing is a crucial aspect in everyones life and no one is born with the right to have heath insurance, you have to earn that. Earning something is much more fulfilling, rewarding, and all around better for you in the end.
    "We have a system that increasingly taxes work and subsidizes non-work."
  12. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #372  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Do you know that 60% of all bankruptcies are medically caused?
    This is total bull crap. 99% of all bankruptcies are caused because of poor decisions. People like you love to throw misleading and misdirecting numbers around to make yourselves sound "informed".
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  13. #373  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Do you know that 60% of all bankruptcies are medically caused?
    Again, throwing statistics around like they're undeniable facts. That study was based on a sample of less that 2,500 people. Less than .2% of all bankruptcies in the year of the study. Using that study to conclude that over 60% of bankruptcies are because of medical bills is laughable.
    No doubt medical bills contribute to bankruptcies. However, the more likely cause of bankruptcies is over-extending one's self with credit cards, irresponsible spending, or taking out mortgages beyond one's means. There are many causes of bankruptcy. However, the main cause is NOT due to medical bills.
  14. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #374  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    What is your solution to ending the cost to each and every tax-payer of no less than $1800/Yr for the active treatment of the uninsured? You know ... The "fancy piechart" which clearly shows a total of 45-46M? Do the math.
    As if you guys have proposed ANYTHING that will cost us less money.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  15. #375  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    When this is your most well-considered response to well-researched, hard numbers, you exclude yourself from the conversation. Is that really what you want?

    What is your solution to ending the cost to each and every tax-payer of no less than $1800/Yr for the active treatment of the uninsured? You know ... The "fancy piechart" which clearly shows a total of 45-46M? Do the math.

    What is your solution to the state-run Medicaid programs which are constantly being hit with reimbursement reductions? You know ... Again, that "fancy piechart" that clearly shows a total of another 38-39M who are unable to obtain insurance, yet whose lives require medical intervention? Do the math.

    Budget that cuts Medicaid reimbursement rates by 8% nears approval

    Oh! That's right. I almost forgot that you had already supplied your solution ... They should eBay their iPod so they can get their required 3 days of ICU time, followed by a week in step-down, followed by a week on a med/surg floor, followed by outpatient treatment to manage their irresponsible behavior.
    Putting that ipod on ebay would be a good start. If that individual does not have health insurance, what are they doing with an ipod? Again, priorities.

    With the numbers you show, tell me how many of those people do not have health insurance because they can't afford it. Then tell me how many of those people have your ipods, or any other consumer products and services they could easily do without in order to pay the premiums on plans that are readily available to those who want to purchase it. Healthcare is expensive. As it should be. You truly do get what you pay for, and like you said, there are no free lunches. That is, unless you back public healthcare. Then your free lunch is paid for by others.
    Last edited by morrison0880; 10/01/2009 at 09:23 AM. Reason: .
  16. #376  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    When I ask:


    And his only reply is:


    Offering no other consideration, Technologic2 is most certainly concluding that parents are the only arbiter where a child's health is concerned. This demonstrates a blindness of what causes disease and disability that goes to the heart of this entire subject. If this represents the best info "those opposed" can employ, it does not bode well for offering an alternative plan of action. What happened when the US last took massive action, based not on hard data, but on fear? No WMD and scores of innocent deaths, despite the marketing claims otherwise.
    No, he is stating that your assertion that McDonalds alone caused diabetes implies that no responsibility should be put on the parents. When I was young, we rarely went out to eat. One reason was because my parents, with my father being the only earner while my mother stayed hom with me and my two brothers and two sisters, simply couldn't afford to eat out very often. Another reason was because my father refused to, as he put it, let us eat garbage. It is amazing that he was able to take responsibility for the food he was giving his children, and surprise! We are all pretty healthy as adults. Again and again and again, it's personal responsibility. Shifting blame to others for your problems is exactly the problem we have in this country. We sue over everything, expect things to be given to us, and then blame the evil corporations for all of our problems. Come on, let's be real. If people took responsibility for their own lives, this country would be in much better shape than it currently is.
  17. #377  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    Nice duck-and-run (pun intended ) on Technologic2's failed argument.

    What don't you get about every tax payer already funding the treatment of the uninsured? That "free lunch" is already funded, which is a significant part of the problem, as its rate of increase is unsustainable. What is your plan of action to stem those costs while also addressing the unsustainable annual private-insurance premium increases of 20%? Do tell!
    There is a big difference between funding the emergency treatment of the uninsured, and covering ALL aspects of healthcare for them.

    It's always fun to have these posting wars, but I'm not going to change your mind that the healthcare problems are an epidemic, and you're not going to convince me that because of the hard work and sacrifice I put into my life in order to get to the point where I can afford good healthcare (I once ate peanut butter sandwiches for a week straight. I love peanut butter, but that's a bit too much!), I need to take care of those who have not. If I am wrong, and everything becomes as good as you seem to believe they will, then great. I'll admit it, and the country will be better off. But if you're wrong, our country will suffer greatly and we will be much worse off than we are now. I wish you luck.
  18. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #378  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    None of those references address what I requested: show me an example of any plan that refuses to provide care to people based on lifestyle changes. Nice misdirection, though.
    Is that what you requested? Some clarification would have helped.
  19.    #379  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    When corporate welfare becomes the crutch that holds up and promotes an industry which then harms the society those corporations serve, there is no remaining room for your argument. In your mind, everyone who has illness brought it upon themselves, which tells me just how ill-informed you are where health is concerned. You're in way over your head on this subject, though that doesn't preclude you from irresponsibly crying 'Freedom!'.
    What an ignorant statement with no basis. And yes, I am in way over my head dealing with people who already know whats in my mind.

    Crying freedom? No, before we can have freedom we have to have responsibility. As long as people like you want to complain about corporate welfare and boo hoo they made me eat their Big Macs and now I have diabetes it is hard to have true freedom.
  20. #380  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    Keep it in context, ok? My statement was in response to yours alleging sin taxes. Now, lacking an intelligent response to the point I originally made to you, you use Technologic2's false assertion that parents, alone, are responsible for a child's health.
    No, you implied that since McDonalds is the cause of Type 2 Diabetes, this is not a problem. Techno asked if the parents shoudn't take personal, and you answered:

    "Offering no other consideration, Technologic2 is most certainly concluding that parents are the only arbiter where a child's health is concerned. This demonstrates a blindness of what causes disease and disability that goes to the heart of this entire subject."

    On that statement, I commented that he did not assert that parents were the sole variable in the health of their child, only that your attempt to blame McDonalds for diabetes neglets the fact that parents have a choice what they feed their children. No where did he assert that parents alone are responsible for a child's health; obviously there are outside factors that can cause illness. Really unsure where you are going with your argument, seems like you lost track of where you were.
    No, what he is asserting is that when people like you blame McDonalds for diabetes in children, you completely ignore the fact that the parents don't need to feed their kids Happy Meals every day. Stop passing the buck and put the responsibility where it should be.

    Still, no one can tell me why they believe it is my responsibility to fund a program that allows people who don't have healthcare to receive it through the state. The only answer I ever get is that "Hey, you shouldn't complain, because you are already paying for the care of the uninsured." Or, "Hey, the war costs a lot of money too, so why are you worried about paying for public healthcare." First, that assumes that I am all for having my tax dollars funding the war, and has nothing to do with the question. Just answer the question of why I am responsible for all aspects of the uninsured healthcare, instead of emergency care. (Yes 1thing, I know that admittance can be part of that care. I never stated it wasn't, and frankly, I'm confused about why you bring it up, since it has nothing to do with the argument.)

Posting Permissions