Socialism One and All!

[cockerpunk]

They ran the biggest moderate on the planet in the last presidential election, and that worked out well didn't it?

Please, we have enough outsiders trying to determine our candidates as it is.

when rush limbah wins the poll for the leader of the republican party, your no longer a moderate party.

and lets face it, palin was the one who lost mccains election for him.

[chafnerjr]

More than what?
If your hospital is actually charging you less for cash-and-carry than the insurance reimbursement rate, I would be very surprised. After all, why would insurance pay more than an individual, when it pays for many individuals? If this were actually the case then insurance would choose to have you billed cash rate, and pay that amount.

Either your billing is misleading or you're reading it wrong.

You can think whatever you like and the insurance company can print anything that they like. I pay much less without insurance than get's charged to my ins. company. I know what I pay in cash for my wife vs. what my ins. pays for me. I don't really care to prove it to you because you can find out yourself (though you won't, you'd rather take a web sites word for it or try to justify why it couldn't happen). After sitting here bashing everything but the gov, I don't see how you could trust any paperwork from either the Ins. company or the Hospitals. Mind you that prescription medication is a different story.

Also seeing as this is turning into that old Obama/lib/socialist vs. everything else thread I'm going to bail out. You won't listen to a single piece of evidence, debate, opinion, or even the constitution. From what everyone's said about you being up to intelligent debate I expected better.

[drg]

You can think whatever you like and the insurance company can print anything that they like. I pay much less without insurance than get's charged to my ins. company. I know what I pay in cash for my wife vs. what my ins. pays for me. I don't really care to prove it to you because you can find out yourself (though you won't, you'd rather take a web sites word for it or try to justify why it couldn't happen).

Likewise you can say whatever you want and refuse to back it up with any proof and no one will, conveniently, be able to prove you wrong. Although, no, the insurance company can't print anything it likes, it can print the real figures or be a target for fraud prosecution. You are under no such oversight.

Again if you are really in that situation, it's going to be a need-based/indigency policy issue, which is outside of the realm of what we are discussing and is a strong argument FOR government intervention (which makes such things possible through subsidies).

Normal, non-need based cash discounts are in the 20-30% range, as you can see insurance negotiated rates are in the 50-75% range.

[athomas]

This is a very typical situation:

http://www.cohospitalprices.org/prices/index.html

What you will see is that on a per-treatment basis, cost to insurers is WAY lower. The only time it is higher is for complicated illnesses that require a lot of care -- without insurance, people simply opt for less care (and of course suffer the consequences).

Interesting. I knew there was a large number of people that did not have/use insurance, but, those numbers are really big. The hospitals charge more than the insurance pays out. That either means the insurance companies don't pay the full amount of the claim submitted by individuals, or the hospital charges individuals more than they charge the insurance companies.

[DevilMan]

Not really trying to stir the pot here... Honest I'm not.

To put it bluntly... I am for abortion. I believe that it can be a much better alternative than the other option. I won't get into what's right, wrong or otherwise about here other than to say, I think it should be legal and it should be allowed for a woman to have 3 of them. After the 3rd one, she gets fixed for good, so she don't have to worry about it any more. There of course would be special circumstances for everything but they would basically be based on police reports and rape issues. Just being careless is not the same.

Anyway, I do feel it should be legal, and I do feel that it IS a medical procedure. I don't know which of you feel the same, but it is stated that the funds from this healthcare bill can NOT be used for such procedures. This is where I got that information ~> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100410/...tupak_retiring

Stupak had little national profile before the health care debate. He led a group of anti-abortion Democrats who held out against the legislation until President Barack Obama agreed to sign an executive order ensuring that federal funds would not be used for abortions.

That to me is just insane. For one abortions CAN be life saving. And yet, it's now decided that it won't be covered?

Anyway, again... I'm not trying to stir the pot, but since this is part of the discussion I think its asinine that it's not something that would be covered.

DM

[drg]

The Hyde Amendment is the relevant legislation that covers this:

http://womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/f/HydeAmendment.htm

It does contain exceptions for mother's health. I'm not in favor of such restrictions; low income women should have access to the same legal services as everyone else.

[DevilMan]

The Hyde Amendment is the relevant legislation that covers this:

http://womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/f/HydeAmendment.htm

It does contain exceptions for mother's health. I'm not in favor of such restrictions; low income women should have access to the same legal services as everyone else.

Are you talking about my restrictions? Or the ones that the Hyde Amendment covers?

Mine would be universal for all types. I think you mean the HA part. And if anything lower income persons should have more access to the services than it being the other way around.

I really don't understand how people can think that putting more burdens on someone as well as society is making the world a better place. Especially when these are the people that refuse to adopt kids that are already here.

Meh... anyway...

DM

[drg]

Are you talking about my restrictions? Or the ones that the Hyde Amendment covers?

Mine would be universal for all types. I think you mean the HA part. And if anything lower income persons should have more access to the services than it being the other way around.

I really don't understand how people can think that putting more burdens on someone as well as society is making the world a better place. Especially when these are the people that refuse to adopt kids that are already here.

Meh... anyway...

DM

I'm not in favor of any restrictions, but in the quote I was specifically talking about the Hyde Amendment restrictions. I don't think abortion is ever done as a whim or recklessly, at least on the part of the woman. There could possibly be outside pressures on the woman, and the less free her decision is, the more vulnerable the woman is to that pressure.

[BigEvil]

when rush limbah wins the poll for the leader of the republican party, your no longer a moderate party.

and lets face it, palin was the one who lost mccains election for him.

BS son. The only reason why he chose her was so that the republican base (which pretty much hates him) would come out to vote. I know I sure as hell wouldn't have.

[cockerpunk]

BS son. The only reason why he chose her was so that the republican base (which pretty much hates him) would come out to vote. I know I sure as hell wouldn't have.

well limbah did win the poll of republicans that he was the defacto leader of the GOP. even Steele (the actual chairmen of the party) said so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU9FHgGPlds

palin convinced more people to not vote for mccain then chose to vote for him. my father a die hard republican and huge mccain supporter couldn't vote for him becuase of palin, and i too, as a moderate, was a huge fan of mccain. i have read his books, and i think he would have made a good president, but couldn't vote for him becuase palin is such an idiot.

they lost that election for many reasons. palin being a big one. the other big one is that the "mavrick" once he was the candidate, stopped being a maverick and started being a neo-con. your supposed to go the other way, be the lock step republican during the primaries, then become the centrist maverick after you got the nomination to win the middle ground. palin took away the primary criticism of obama, his inexperience, becuase she is a beauty queen, an inexperienced politician, and a complete idiot.

it was a big strategic error picking palin, and that combined with other critical mistakes, made for the obama win.

[BigEvil]

well limbah did win the poll of republicans that he was the defacto leader of the GOP. even Steele (the actual chairmen of the party) said so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU9FHgGPlds

palin convinced more people to not vote for mccain then chose to vote for him. my father a die hard republican and huge mccain supporter

I just stopped reading the rest of your post right there. That comment is an oxymoron. McCain's record proves that he has gone against Republican values his entire carrier. They invented the term R.I.N.O pretty much because of him.

Funny how he seems to be leaning more to the right nowadays. Then gets Pailin to come stump for him in Arizona.

[cockerpunk]

I just stopped reading the rest of your post right there. That comment is an oxymoron. McCain's record proves that he has gone against Republican values his entire carrier. They invented the term R.I.N.O pretty much because of him.

Funny how he seems to be leaning more to the right nowadays. Then gets Pailin to come stump for him in Arizona.

thats becuase mccain is a normal right winger, and your innablity to see that only proves my point from before - the right wing is SO far right wing that centrists are now socialists. and being slightly on the left makes you a full blown communist.

so you just proved my point, the Republican party is no longer a mainstream or right party, they have no moderates, and they don't want any moderates. they literally burn moderates alive becuase they are not "pure." including of course, anyone with half a brain.

hell, the institute for the next American century (ie the neo-con think tank) just fired someone becuase he said that the way the right wing is going about its protests of the health care bill is counterproductive. opps, that means your not intellectually pure enough to be a Republican if you don't support the brick throwing, name calling, threats and actions of the protesters are good.

NO MODERATES ALLOWED - the new republican mantra.

[BigEvil]

thats becuase mccain is a normal right winger, and your innablity to see that only proves my point from before - the right wing is SO far right wing that centrists are now socialists. and being slightly on the left makes you a full blown communist.

so you just proved my point, the Republican party is no longer a mainstream or right party, they have no moderates, and they don't want any moderates. they literally burn moderates alive becuase they are not "pure." including of course, anyone with half a brain.

hell, the institute for the next American century (ie the neo-con think tank) just fired someone becuase he said that the way the right wing is going about its protests of the health care bill is counterproductive. opps, that means your not intellectually pure enough to be a Republican if you don't support the brick throwing, name calling, threats and actions of the protesters.

If by 'main-stream' you mean "state-ist", than yes, you are right.

[drg]

If by 'main-stream' you mean "state-ist", than yes, you are right.

I always chuckle at the charges of "statism" leveled against various people at various times. America didn't get to where it is because of a weak state, and it doesn't project power worldwide based on the individual unconnected efforts of Americans. A strong state is essential to the American reality. Decentralization is weakness ... this is why we created nations in the first place.

[cockerpunk]

I always chuckle at the charges of "statism" leveled against various people at various times. America didn't get to where it is because of a weak state, and it doesn't project power worldwide based on the individual unconnected efforts of Americans. A strong state is essential to the American reality. Decentralization is weakness ... this is why we created nations in the first place.

as much as i am a federalist, the federal system needs to recognize its flaws. government isn't the solution, its a necessary evil.