Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: capt. apathy on December 21, 2005, 11:22:00 AM
-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10559749/
WASHINGTON - The Republican-controlled Senate passed legislation to cut federal deficits by $39.7 billion on Wednesday by the narrowest of margins, 51-50, with Vice President Dick Cheney casting the deciding vote.
The measure, the product of a year's labors by the White House and congressional Republicans, imposes the first restraints in nearly a decade of federal benefit programs such as Medicaid, Medicare and student loans.
"This is the one vote you'll have this year to reduce the rate of growth of the federal government," said Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, in a final plea for passage.
But Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada countered that the GOP was advancing "an ideologically driven, extreme, radical budget. It caters to lobbyists and an elite group of ultraconservative ideologues here in Washington, all at the expense of middle class Americans," he said.
Cheney flies back in nick of time
Republicans signaled earlier in the week they would need the vice president to be present for the final vote on deficit cuts, and he flew back early from an overseas diplomatic mission.
"The vice president votes in the affirmative," he said, speaking only a few words as dictated by Senate custom. He wasn't the only one who made an unexpected trip back to Washington. Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., flew back on Tuesday night. He has been recuperating at home from knee replacement surgery, and he made his way into the Senate with the aid of a walker.
The roll call delivered less than the final victory Republicans had hoped for.
In maneuvering in advance of the final vote, Democrats succeeded in forcing minor change that will require the House to return to Washington to vote on the bill before it can be sent to President Bush for his signature.
Passage is all but certain, but the timing remains in question, since most House members have returned home for the holidays.
The vote came on the first of two major measures facing tests in the Senate during the day.
On the second, Republicans maneuvered to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling. Democrats opposed that measure with a filibuster, and Republicans scrambled for the 60 votes needed to prevail.
Cuts make small dent in deficit
By themselves, the deficit cuts included in the five-year bill would amount to only 2.5 percent of projected shortfalls totaling $1.6 trillion over the same time frame. Republicans said the significance lies in more than mere numbers, adding that programs such as Medicare and Medicaid threaten to consume an unsustainable amount of federal revenue if their growth is not trimmed quickly.
Home health care payments under Medicare would be frozen at current levels for a year under the bill, Medicaid regulations would be changed to make it harder for the elderly to qualify for federal nursing home benefits by turning assets over to their children.
Lender subsidies are reduced as part of an attempt to squeeze $12.6 billion from student loan programs. Another provision raises $3.6 billion for the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., the federal agency that protects certain pension plans. The money would come from an increase in the premium employers pay for each covered worker or retiree, and from a fee on companies that end their pension plans.
Billions more would come from programs unrelated to benefit programs. The legislation assumes $10 billion in federal receipts from the sale of part of the analog spectrum, for example.
Five Republicans cross party lines
All 44 Democrats voted against the measure, as did Sen. James Jeffords of Vermont, an independent. Five of 55 Republicans crossed party lines to oppose the bill as well. They were Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, Gordon Smith of Oregon, Mike DeWine of Ohio and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island. Of them, Chafee, DeWine and Snowe are seeking re-election next year.
It was the seventh time since Cheney became vice president that he used his powers to break a tie vote, according to records maintained by the Office of the Secretary of the Senate.
With lawmakers eager to adjourn for the holidays, the Senate moved almost immediately into a debate on the ANWR oil drilling provisions.
The outcome of that vote, too, was too close to call. This time, Cheney was not a factor, though, since supporters of the bill needed 60 votes to overcome last-ditch Democratic opposition.
-
People complain whether the government spends or cuts.
-
I never realized they were at war with me and my broke ass.
-
The measure, the product of a year's labors by the White House and congressional Republicans, imposes the first restraints in nearly a decade of federal benefit programs such as Medicaid, Medicare and student loans.
We are waging war on the poor by giving them less taxpayer money?
This is interesting, considering that many poor in America are defined as such because they can't afford to go to college without student loans... like I did. Payed for four years by living like a hermit and working hard.
Go to the third world and see poor with no plumbing, no hospital to go to even if they could afford it, no sewage systems other than that which is running on the surface thru town.
-
I'd define poor by not being able to afford basic medical attention.
why is it we have no problem finding billions to fight a war to (at least today anyway, I'm sure we'll be there for a different reason if this one stops working) liberate Iraq, but we can't find the money for basic medical care for our own citizens?
we can blow up and rebuild Iraq, but my neighbor gets sick & is dying, his family's finances are devastated, all resources and efforts in the family go to wards caring for him(not sure what he has, there was some talk of naming the condition after him a few years back. not an 'honor' I'd ever want to receive). his wife and child (who moved back in to care for her parents) have to forgo medical attention since there is simply no money left after trying to keep him alive. finally after 4 or 5 years of neglecting her own health so her husband/family can survive, his wife simply has to go to the emergency room as her deteriorating health is so far gone that it can no longer be ignored, regardless of the fact that she can't afford it. her diagnosis "your cancer is systemic, if we could have diagnosed you 3 or 4 years ago we might have been able to do something for you but at this point you should focus on getting your affairs in order and spending time with your family"
the daughter may need a kidney transplant, due to damage mostly brought on by not getting basic medical attention after simple kidney infections. her mother is the most likely donor.
meanwhile he gets to live not only with his pain, reduced life, and impending demise but also with the likely hood that caring for him has killed his wife and maybe even his daughter.
this is a war, there are casualties.
"Richest Country in the World" - my ass. maybe in your neighborhood.
-
How is a war on socialism and the extorting of money from people a "war on the poor"?
Why do I have to pay for anyones medical care?
lazs
-
why do I have to pay (signifigantly more btw) for a war in Iraq against people who've never been a problem for me? why is it that their schools, and hospitals are a priority over mine when spending my money?
-
Sounds like the war on taxpayers has been stepped down a notch.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
I'd define poor by not being able to afford basic medical attention.
why is it we have no problem finding billions to fight a war to (at least today anyway, I'm sure we'll be there for a different reason if this one stops working) liberate Iraq, but we can't find the money for basic medical care for our own citizens?
we can blow up and rebuild Iraq, but my neighbor gets sick & is dying, his family's finances are devastated, all resources and efforts in the family go to wards caring for him(not sure what he has, there was some talk of naming the condition after him a few years back. not an 'honor' I'd ever want to receive). his wife and child (who moved back in to care for her parents) have to forgo medical attention since there is simply no money left after trying to keep him alive. finally after 4 or 5 years of neglecting her own health so her husband/family can survive, his wife simply has to go to the emergency room as her deteriorating health is so far gone that it can no longer be ignored, regardless of the fact that she can't afford it. her diagnosis "your cancer is systemic, if we could have diagnosed you 3 or 4 years ago we might have been able to do something for you but at this point you should focus on getting your affairs in order and spending time with your family"
the daughter may need a kidney transplant, due to damage mostly brought on by not getting basic medical attention after simple kidney infections. her mother is the most likely donor.
meanwhile he gets to live not only with his pain, reduced life, and impending demise but also with the likely hood that caring for him has killed his wife and maybe even his daughter.
this is a war, there are casualties.
"Richest Country in the World" - my ass. maybe in your neighborhood.
yawn
Karaya
-
what all this whining about?
-
Umm, we reduced projected spending.
When's the last time you heard someone on Medicaid COULDNT get the care they need?
Heck, they've got it made compared to the medical plan my workplace offers.
Next time I need to go to walk-in care, I'll say im an illegal
:)
-
BAM!!!
-
Lame troll. No one can honestly belive there is an active war on the poor. Think about it, us greedy Republicans can't Take your money if you don't Have any. We want you working, earning, and spending. Get it? You make more, We make more. You go broke, we make less. We Want you poor? Don't be stupid.
Only ones I see complaining about it are those who would rather not work. So don't, but don't expect me to pay for it. Work, buy medical insurance instead of a color TV. Walk to work or Bike instead of a car. Amazing how much money is there to spend if it's not wasted. But again, I have to pay for someone elses inability to think for themselves? I don't think so.
Want a car, a color tv AND medical insurance? Get an education, earn more. Really not a difficult concept. I don't understand how people Cannot understand that and expect someone else to take care of them. That's what Mom and Dad are for, I am neither.
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
Sounds like the war on taxpayers has been stepped down a notch.
Bingo !
-
Originally posted by ROC
Lame troll. No one can honestly belive there is an active war on the poor.
Its the same as the war on Christmas:)
HAPPY HOLIDAYS:)
-
Even the Democrats have been aghast about our budget deficits of late, so they try to trim 39 billion out of a......gaZILLion....by doing stuff like cutting the RATES OF INCREASE (THAT means they STILL get more than last year) of several programs. (At any rate, deficit projections have been revised downward by a far bit, as revenues have increased a lot since the recession of pre and post 9/11)
-
well... the constitution gives the government the power to raise an army for the defense of the nation but it doesn't give them the right to raise an army to extort money out of me to pay for your medical care.
I don't like paying for wars either but.... they get paid for... maybe in 10 years but they do get paid for...
Your friggin medical bills just get bigger and bigger and bigger for eternity. They never end.
Maybe if you weren't paying so much in taxes you could afford medical insurance?
lazs
-
you know I was just thinking about what the basic responsibility of our nation is to it's people. our "mission statement" is laid out fairly well in the pre-amble of the constitution.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
1. establish justice
2. insure domestic tranquility
3. provide for the common defense
4. promote the general Welfare
5. secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity.
I see "promote the general Welfare" laying our a reasonable justification for a national health plan. while not a mandate it certainly doesn't run contrary to our purpose.
while "securing the blessings of liberty" and "providing for the common defense" would justify the need to go to war, they sure wouldn't apply to this war.
this administration pisses away billions in someone else's country, and gives huge tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans, doing a major about face on the previous trend to end deficit spending, then has the nerve to let the poor and the elderly shoulder the burden by cutting their health care, and limiting their children's opportunity to Sucre a better life for themselves by continuing education beyond what their families can provide.
-
Taxbreaks to the wealthiest of Americans
Uh huh.
Well let's see, my taxes have steadily gone down and I make under $40k a year. Now you can complain all you want about taxes being too low...and as a citizen, you have the means (and the IRS has the paperwork) for you to pay more. So if you are so content with everyone paying huge taxes to settle your conscience, feel free to mail in 40%, 60% or 80% of your income.
Those small decreases have made it possible for me to replace some windows in my home and several other energy saving projects.
Those taxbreaks help those of us in the middle out. The rich will always be rich, no matter what amount you try to squeeze from them.
And the poor will always be poor, despite all the money you toss at them. Its up to them to desire to be more than they are.
-
huge tax breaks to the wealthy? Surely you joke. Who pays almost all of the taxes in the US? The wealthy. How much of the total personal tax revenue collected on an annual basis do you think the top 10% of the wealthy pay? Come on, lets hear your well informed guess. Look it up & then lets hear your arguement to how come that is fair.
Also, all ready stated in another post today, most people are in there job & eocomic situation because of choices they made along the way, maybe no college, poor grades in HS cuz screw around & whole host of other reasons. People should accept personal responsibilty for their decisions that lead them to where they are at. If you are relying on the government to provide for your welfare, you are foolish. I sure don't want my $$ going to provide for the welfare of people that have made poor choices. I work to hard to provide for my own personnal welfare & my family.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Maybe if you weren't paying so much in taxes you could afford medical insurance?
lazs
Especially at the top of the minimum wage scale. Bought any lately?
-
Pft, I havent seen even the burger joints paying minimal wage in years.
Most of those places around here are screaming for employees. The local mall I work Saturday's at hires kids for between $8 and $8.75
But hey, by all means, dont be turned off by the facts :)
-
what facts?
most jobs I see (and I've been looking) pay somewhere between 7.25 and 9.
at my previous job the contribution for our health&welfare plan (payed by the employer as part of our contract)was just under $9 per hour. doesn't leave much for luxuries like a roof or food.
my mother in-law has a good job, has had it for 20 years. manages a bank branch. her husband is sick, virtually every penny of her income goes to medical care, they are living off his retirement and second mortgages.
yes there are new jobs, but Wal-mart, or one of those new manufacturing jobs (manufacturing burgers at Burger King) aren't going to pay enough to support your family in this economy.
this administration has a national health plan. plan not to get sick, or you're gonna die.
-
"I haven't seen Berlin yet, from the ground or the air, and I plan on doing both, BEFORE the war is over."
The war ended 60 years ago. And Berlin is excellent place to visit. So I'm not entirely sure why you have this quote as a tag-line...
-
Dowding was the name of an RAF strategist. Are you trying to impersonate him or something?
-
By how much did these programs increase? Maybe not have been as much as the Dems wanted, but they still increased.
4. promote the general Welfare
I see this as Stay the F out of my business. Provide roads, law, security, and judicial systems.
Not give away:
syringes, to junkies
Turkey basters lesbians,
Meth, to drug attacks
Prescription drugs to any one over 65
Food to those who chose to drop out of high school
housing to anyone with kids and NO husband
etc.etc.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
The war ended 60 years ago. And Berlin is excellent place to visit. So I'm not entirely sure why you have this quote as a tag-line...
Hilts, played by Steve McQueen, is a character from the movie "The Great Escape". The quote is a line of his from the movie.
-
promote the general welfare has nothing to do with extorting money from one citizen to give to another or to running a helth care industry.
You simply want someone else to pay for stuff you can't or won't afford.
Why should you even get $5 or $7 an hour when there are people who are homeless.... maybe you should be paying more for them? Once you have brought those poor wretches up to your level then we will talk about what you need.
see? It is only good to have "free" stuff and help poor people when you are the benificiary... you don't really want anything but to make other people pay for what you won't work for.
lazs
-
This thread has potential....Think I'll have my bowl of Chilli and Crackers w/ a Coke and watch.
Please................continu e
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Maybe if you weren't paying so much in taxes you could afford medical insurance?
lazs
Bingo.
Side Note: Funny how one tax payer tells another "I dont want to pay for your stinking program" The ones being accused of living on "taxpayers" money is many times a "taxpayer" themselves. None the less..Paying taxes isn't an option. End Note.
"Give me my FRIKIN tax money and ill spend it as i please! Med Insurance, Food, Utility bills and so on! Sure the government could reduce our taxes enough to let all afford the things we "Need" But then some utility company will raise the bar and take it all back. :rofl
-
Originally posted by lazs2
promote the general welfare has nothing to do with extorting money from one citizen to give to another or to running a helth care industry.
You simply want someone else to pay for stuff you can't or won't afford.
Why should you even get $5 or $7 an hour when there are people who are homeless.... maybe you should be paying more for them? Once you have brought those poor wretches up to your level then we will talk about what you need.
see? It is only good to have "free" stuff and help poor people when you are the benificiary... you don't really want anything but to make other people pay for what you won't work for.
lazs
my possition hasn't changed from when I could afford health care to now that I can't.
when I had no problem covering everything my family needed I still saw no need for anyone in this country to go without basic healthcare.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
my possition hasn't changed from when I could afford health care to now that I can't.
when I had no problem covering everything my family needed I still saw no need for anyone in this country to go without basic healthcare.
Apathy...sorry for your job situation
A co-worker and I discussed this the other night sort of. Is it the government that is the problem or the 5million a year CEO for the insurance company. Is it the government or the 2 cent pill that costs 3.00 at the counter.
The government may hold some of the blame....but the insurance companies , drug companies and pretty much the entire medical industry IMHO hold the biggest part of it.
-
I agree that greedy drug companies hold the lions share of the blame for high prescription prices.
there is also the basic bureaucracy in the insurance industry that increases the cost of health-care without having a positive effect on the service(as far as hands on medical care, I don't know how this affects prescriptions).
I was talking to one of my doctors the other day (luckily I do still receive medical care on the issues related to my work injury. although it's rough to go to your appointments knowing there is no money for your wife to see a doctor). he was telling me that in the late 70's for every 2 hands on medical care providers they had 1 additional support staff (basically doctor, nurse or assistant, and then receptionist/billing) he says the hospital had similar if not more efficient ratios. now it's more like 4-5 handling paper work for every care provider, this does not count the pencil pushers working directly for the insurance company who also chew on your health-care dollar.
but there is also no shortage of blame for the gov't. it is more interested in protecting the profits of the medical industry than it's citizens. a couple simple and fairly high profile points are medical marijuana and people going to Canada to get their meds. I find the gov't stance on these issues particularly offensive considering this administrations alleged stance on states rights and free trade.
both of these could lower health care costs. for the price of a grow light and a bit of potting soil chronic pain sufferers could supply their own meds at no cost to anyone.
and if we are to believe the republican philosophy on free trade, a bit of competition across the Canadian border could only make our local drug companies more efficient and their products more affordable.
why is it OK for a company to shop around and get the most bang for their labor buck over-seas but our drug companies can't handle the competition.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
I agree that greedy drug companies hold the lions share of the blame for high prescription prices.
.
Ah yes, research and development costs for new drugs, fighting new diseases is so cheap too! Why, if we force those drug company's to a set amount of profit I'm sure we can develope new drugs and cures for diseases! :confused: :confused:
-
not saying to regulate there profits or anything like that, just don't regulate the customer either.
let people get their meds from where ever they choose. keep the laws that say drugs sold in the US need to be FDA approved. but when people choose to grow their own meds, or buy them over-seas, lets call that free trade and protect it.
btw- how much do they spend giving trips and bribes to doctors to get there meds prescribed (even for diseases they aren't approved to be used on)? how much do they spend on lobbyists to influence law to get higher profits. any way I could just have that percentage of the cost deducted from my prescriptions and just let the people who are OK with that sort of business practice pick up that tab. if I'm going to be forced by my gov't to do business with these people I should have the option of opting out on 'services' they offer that I don't approve of.
-
bout time we started fighting the poor. They need to do their part to pay their fair share of taxes. ;)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Ah yes, research and development costs for new drugs, fighting new diseases is so cheap too! Why, if we force those drug company's to a set amount of profit I'm sure we can develope new drugs and cures for diseases! :confused: :confused:
Hi Rip
Without googleing til I'm blue , cause I don't need to , do you think drugs are fair priced?
Lets say Xeloda , 60 day supply , 2000.00? I don't mean from some cheap drugs company , I mean thats what it costs to get it from a pharmacy. You know when they only charge you your Co-Pay yet you see the bill. Over 2k for 60 day supply.
How about Aredia. 1 shot. 4500.00. Thats what is on the bill anyway.
How about a CT Scan. 1 every 3 months for say....over 3k. 15 minutes under a machine. done.
Hey here's a good one. Bone scan. Yeah the ole Nuclear medicine. 8500.00 billed to the insurance company.
PET Scan. Now theres another one.
How about Daily meds. Say Cumiden , Lorazapam , Phenegren and about 5 more pills. This is of course just to keep you out of pain , calm , and try to make your life , or whats left of it , tolerable and somewhat of a quality of life for a bit.
So , If I remember correctly it was somewhere in the neighborhood of 3-4 k a month for normal pills and add to that when the xeloda came around.
I totally understand R/D being expensive. But do you honestly think for an instance that the drug companies aren't frkin killing us?
I agree with most of the others posts here.
I HATE DESPISE paying taxes for some deadbeat POC to sit on thier lazy butt and let us pay thier way.
But Health insurance costs , and things associated with it are out of control.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
what facts?
most jobs I see (and I've been looking) pay somewhere between 7.25 and 9.
at my previous job the contribution for our health&welfare plan (payed by the employer as part of our contract)was just under $9 per hour. doesn't leave much for luxuries like a roof or food.
my mother in-law has a good job, has had it for 20 years. manages a bank branch. her husband is sick, virtually every penny of her income goes to medical care, they are living off his retirement and second mortgages.
yes there are new jobs, but Wal-mart, or one of those new manufacturing jobs (manufacturing burgers at Burger King) aren't going to pay enough to support your family in this economy.
this administration has a national health plan. plan not to get sick, or you're gonna die.
Judging by the possible choices for perspective employment you mentioned, I would suggest you acquire some $@$#@#@ SKILLS that WARRANT decent pay--not a lot of mba's working at Walmart or Burger King--the capitalist system is there for you to make of it what you will--- if that is a problem, move to France, with their free health care, anemic economy, and double-digit unemployment. If you could make $20 an hour at Walmart, WHY bother to LEARN any valuable skills?
-
apathy... if you feel that you should help others when you are doing well then you are welcome to do so... It is called charity... I give to two very efficient charities ritght now.... If I paid less taxes I would give more.
You want things regulated by a strong government yet complain when drugs are expensive.... there are lots of drugs out there that would be cheap to put on the market.... if.... you are willing to forgo the testing process or, even, shorten it. sure... a few may die or get sick..
You want government health care even tho it will be the end of malpractice suits (ever sue the government?) but you are unwilling to fix the better system we have now by limiting malpractice.
Cheaper drugs and limitied malpractice would make the system we have much cheaper for everyone than any socialized medicine program (except the very bottom of the barrel useless).
It has been estimated that health care would be about 20% of current rates if malpractice suits were limited and the drug testing procedure were streamlined.
How do any of you think a governement run health care system could be as good as the one we have and be affordable? Have you never been to a public school or DMV or watched a government program in action?
Or... do you simply think that we should destroy the productive people in the U.S. with crushing taxes?
lazs
-
I think we could apply the money we pissed away (and are pissing away now) in Iraq.
if you read the previous posts, you'd see I also said to let our drug companies have a bit of competition, have the gov't stop enforcing their monopoly for them and allow people to use medical marijuana and get drugs from over seas if they choose to do so.
see the problem with this and most other republican administrations, is that they talk a good game on deregulation and getting the gov't out of your life but they really only want to deregulate corporations and the rich, and regulate the rest of us for them.
explain this to me if you can. how does not allowing people to get their meds in Canada, and fighting so hard against state laws allowing the medical use of marijuana (again, both issues that would reduce health costs, even for those who don't opt for these) fit into this administrations public philosophy? how does this fit with an ideology of free trade, open competition, and state rights?
my guess is that it fits if this administration is in the pocket of big business. but I'd like to hear yours.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Judging by the possible choices for perspective employment you mentioned, I would suggest you acquire some $@$#@#@ SKILLS that WARRANT decent pay--not a lot of mba's working at Walmart or Burger King--the capitalist system is there for you to make of it what you will--- if that is a problem, move to France, with their free health care, anemic economy, and double-digit unemployment. If you could make $20 an hour at Walmart, WHY bother to LEARN any valuable skills?
I have skills, just can't use them. was making 50-60k a year 3 years ago, in the top of my field, and actually making much less than I could have been but holding back until my kids were raised. 2 years from now my youngest will graduate HS, then my earnings would have climbed 10-20k a year.
even factoring in no raises and only working 1,500-2000 hrs a year I would have been able to retire in my mid 50's at around 125-150k per year in pension and would have been sitting on an annuity worth about $1/3M.
I'm not lazy, I don't go running around with out a plan. I've been working my bellybutton off and taking care of other people since I was in my teens.
the problem is that people get to forgetting how lucky they are. they start to thinking they deserve all of their toys, their nice houses, and soft lives. maybe they do. but there are a lot of people who put in just as much work and planning and don't have those things. but those that do can pretend these people don't exist.
you see the people that it doesn't work out for don't live in your community, you don't talk to them, and it's real easy to pretend they don't exist. that all of those people with nothing, have nothing because they do nothing. some of those people have nothing because they never had anything and they never had a shot.
I hear so many people who have great jobs and nice homes talk of how they are 'self made men' and 'did it on their own. I'd suggest they stop crowing, and thumping their chests for a minute and realize how much help they've had.
did you have a reasonably safe neighborhood? any body shoot at you on your way home?
get enough to eat? medical care? a place to study? could you do your homework at night or did you have to help your family make a living?
did God bless you (or where you lucky if that's how your ideology runs) with a sound mind and body, and the good fortune to be safe from accidents or disease throughout your life, or the ability to fight back from them?
when you became old enough to make your own way did you have an address to put down on an application so you could look for a job? did you have a phone number they could call if they wanted to hire you? how did you get those things before you "made yourself"?
we are the wealthiest nation on earth. there is no reason that anybody should go without basic medical attention, or a fighting shot at an education.
BTW- you should be thankful for all those people who are 'beneath you' if it weren't for them you'd be the lowest POS in this nation.
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Pft, I havent seen even the burger joints paying minimal wage in years.
Most of those places around here are screaming for employees. The local mall I work Saturday's at hires kids for between $8 and $8.75
But hey, by all means, dont be turned off by the facts :)
Isn't a local mall anywhere around here. And your probably right. They pay everybody too much in the city. And nobody is screaming for employees around here. Not everybody is in a rosy urban enviroment with malls that can't hire people at 8$ an hour. But don't let that fact enter your urban focused mind.
-
Its the same as the war on Christmas
LOL Lew, Good one! That's pretty much a joke as well.
Merry Christmas by the way :D Hope all is well with you, get back on BW, no one said you could leave.
(Thought this thread died, suprised to see it pop up again)
-
Hospitals are going under in a lot of cities due to the free medical care they are forced to give to those who have no insurance---in border towns like in south Texas, Mexicans come across the border JUST to have their babies (at our expense) then go back home, leaving an already-strained hospital with yet anouth $20-30k bill that wont get paid--NOONE is turned away from a public hostpital in this country, which isn't to say that old folks dont have to often pay a lot for their meds--the prescription drug benefit program Bush pushed through a few years ago is starting about now (to a collective YAWN from the media), which is suppose to help address that. That being said, I don't think Jefferson put anything in the constitution about free medical care.
the problem is that people get to forgetting how lucky they are. they start to thinking they deserve all of their toys, their nice houses, and soft lives. maybe they do. but there are a lot of people who put in just as much work and planning and don't have those things. but those that do can pretend these people don't exist.
I dont know that i'm lucky, but I DO deserve the stuff I have--I'm a blue collar puke (electronic techie) I work 2 jobs--have had 1 day off this month. watermelon happens...wife got cancer this year, got tons of bills..lost income...the worst thing ya can do is look at what others have and feel jealousy or envy--utterly UNproductive emotion
-
Originally posted by RedTop
Hi Rip
Without googleing til I'm blue , cause I don't need to , do you think drugs are fair priced?
Lets say Xeloda , 60 day supply , 2000.00? I don't mean from some cheap drugs company , I mean thats what it costs to get it from a pharmacy. You know when they only charge you your Co-Pay yet you see the bill. Over 2k for 60 day supply.
How about Aredia. 1 shot. 4500.00. Thats what is on the bill anyway.
How about a CT Scan. 1 every 3 months for say....over 3k. 15 minutes under a machine. done.
Hey here's a good one. Bone scan. Yeah the ole Nuclear medicine. 8500.00 billed to the insurance company.
PET Scan. Now theres another one.
How about Daily meds. Say Cumiden , Lorazapam , Phenegren and about 5 more pills. This is of course just to keep you out of pain , calm , and try to make your life , or whats left of it , tolerable and somewhat of a quality of life for a bit.
So , If I remember correctly it was somewhere in the neighborhood of 3-4 k a month for normal pills and add to that when the xeloda came around.
I totally understand R/D being expensive. But do you honestly think for an instance that the drug companies aren't frkin killing us?
I agree with most of the others posts here.
I HATE DESPISE paying taxes for some deadbeat POC to sit on thier lazy butt and let us pay thier way.
But Health insurance costs , and things associated with it are out of control.
Just a quick reply as I can't answer each and every one of these, but this much I do know:
Aredia is administered on a monthly basis. Its roughly $1000 a shot (here in Seattle, Wifes a nursing administrator), and yes, it does cost alot to manufacture. Y
ou should try researching how much this stuff (Pharms) costs to manufacture, you'll see that the profit is slightly higher than what the average restaurant makes off a bottle of wine at in a restaurant.
I'd rather pay alittle more for top notch research and development, thats why the average age continues to rise globally.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Hospitals are going under in a lot of cities due to the free medical care they are forced to give to those who have no insurance---in border towns like in south Texas, Mexicans come across the border JUST to have their babies (at our expense) then go back home, leaving an already-strained hospital with yet anouth $20-30k bill that wont get paid--NOONE is turned away from a public hostpital in this country, which isn't to say that old folks dont have to often pay a lot for their meds--the prescription drug benefit program Bush pushed through a few years ago is starting about now (to a collective YAWN from the media), which is suppose to help address that. That being said, I don't think Jefferson put anything in the constitution about free medical care.
I dont know that i'm lucky, but I DO deserve the stuff I have--I'm a blue collar puke (electronic techie) I work 2 jobs--have had 1 day off this month. watermelon happens...wife got cancer this year, got tons of bills..lost income...the worst thing ya can do is look at what others have and feel jealousy or envy--utterly UNproductive emotion
Yep. Good Samaritan law. Harborview in Seattle had one drug addict that OD'd 4 times in one year, costing the good o;' taxpayers of this state $1,000,000 ...all free because this person was homeless and a druggy (THanks again for the 1960's culture!) WHo says we don't have free medical in this country? :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by Lye-El
Isn't a local mall anywhere around here. And your probably right. They pay everybody too much in the city. And nobody is screaming for employees around here. Not everybody is in a rosy urban enviroment with malls that can't hire people at 8$ an hour. But don't let that fact enter your urban focused mind.
Urban mind?
Dear God that's funny
Do a Mapquest of Bangor Maine and tell me how metropolitan my area is LOL
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Hospitals are going under in a lot of cities due to the free medical care they are forced to give to those who have no insurance---in border towns like in south Texas, Mexicans come across the border JUST to have their babies (at our expense) then go back home, leaving an already-strained hospital with yet anouth $20-30k bill that wont get paid--NOONE is turned away from a public hostpital in this country,
another problem caused by the lack of a health plan.
yes a hospital emergency room is required to treat you (stabilize your condition). that means that if someone is sick (say strep, and ear infection, respiratory infection or the like) and can't afford the $100 it costs to see a doctor, they'll use the emergency room for the services that should be handled by a clinic. (and keep you waiting forever when you need the ER for an actual emergency, by flooding it with cases it shouldn't even be handling)
the emergency room will keep them sitting in the waiting room for 6-10 hours, run labs on a condition thats now gone too long without treatment, give them initial treatment, a prescription for 3-5 days worth of meds (that they won't be able to afford to fill), and instructions to follow up with their family physician, who doesn't exist.
then they are sent on their way, little if nothing is accomplished as far as curing them (since they'll be back when it gets worse again) and they drag their sick bellybutton to work to pass whatever they have around to the rest of us.
then when they run out on the bill the rest of us pick up the tab (in higher med costs) for an ER visit($300-500 + labs, treatment and meds) that didn't solve the problem so will likely come up again.
with a national health plan the guy could have made an appointment with the doctor early on, missed a half of a day of work to make the appointment, picked up his meds, cured his problem and been on his way.
$100 for a office visit + $20-50 for meds and the problem is over. seems a more efficient use of my dollar to me. plus I can get in and out of the ER much faster when I or someone I care about needs it.
-
"Do a Mapquest of Bangor Maine and tell me how metropolitan my area is LOL"
i did a quick search and within seconds found job postings for more than you could make in any mall, anywhere...any male over 18 who willingly works in a mall (as anything other than security or facility) is a fool...
-
apathy... I agree that drug laws should be streamlined to get drugs on the market cheaper but... you do realize that some will get sick or die that wouldn't have otherwise right? No president want's say..... a couple of hundred thalidimide babies as a legacy... that is really all there is to it.
As for the war.... you could take all we spend on the war and put it toward free health care and it would run the program for a year or so... think of paying for a war every year for eternity... wars get paid off.... socialism never does...
but... you never answered my question.... do you really think the government could effectively run a health care program with the same doctors and level of expertise and the same freedom of the people to go where they want and sue for millions for malpractice? How thick would the "attorney" section of the phone book be without malpractice or medical suits? Blame the lawyers if you want someone to blame..
and.... as for taxes... let me tell you a sad story...equal to your own I reckon only not about health care but about the taxes and tax men you seem to think will solve everything..
my girlfriend got layed off from a middle management job... she had to cash out the retirement program to live off of... she thought she payed the taxes on it but seems.... she was about a grand short on the federal and state taxes...
now... by the time the benevbolent government you like so much got around to telling her they had tacked on about twice as much in late fees. penalties and interest...
she is making $12 an hour... forget health care... she can't pay the interest on the taxes... she has been paying a couple hundred bucks a month to the state and feds for 4 years and giving up all her tax refunds for those years... she may just get out from under the feds with this years tax refund sent to them but will take another year or so to pay off the state....if nothing bad happens in the mean time..
Her life is a living hell under your tax system... you would ask to make it worse. her mickey mouse job at least pays health care but nothing in the world can save her from the big brother you want us to embrace.
lazs
-
yes I do think they could run it as well as it is ran now.
some things (not everything) are just better suited to be universally provided.
for example police and fire protection.
if the fire department ran like our health care system you'd be sitting out on the curb filling out forms while rushing back into the flames for your insurance card before they could start putting out your house.
or the police
"sorry to hear about your daughter mister Johnson. there is really nothing I can do. guess you should have kept up that rape coverage on your family policy"
police, fire, national defense, are all covered by the gov't because of the nature of the service. meaning when you need it you need it now, you have no time or ability to negotiate fairly, or wait for some pencil pusher to make a determination as to your eligibility, and opting not to use the service is not an option you'll likely survive. in short when you have a need of these services they have you over a barrel so we pay for them collectively at a price negotiated at a time outside the immediate need.
health care is the same type of service and needs to be handled in the same way.
as far as your friend. I feel for her. I've done the same thing and been in the same position myself. payments of $100 a month were really a ***** when construction work shuts down for the winter and the money is paid out of your UI check.
but how is this any different than shorting any other bill and having to pay what you owe? in my case I screwed up, claimed too may deductions early in the year on a short, heavy overtime job (were they tax you as if they think you are going to make that $3,600 a week for the whole year) and forgot to change it to the proper deductions when I returned to work for the same employer later that year on a 4 month, 50 hr per week job. they didn't take out enough taxes and I ended up owing the feds about a grand and Oregon 2k.
bottom line though was I screwed up, my screw up my job to make it right. if she screwed up and didn't pay enough taxes she needs to fix it, any complaining is really just crybaby crap.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Ah yes, research and development costs for new drugs, fighting new diseases is so cheap too! Why, if we force those drug company's to a set amount of profit I'm sure we can develope new drugs and cures for diseases! :confused: :confused:
We have been over this so many times.:)
Research is actually conducted on a large scale at Universities. Funded by guess who> We the people.
The drug and medical insurance industries operate at an overhead of between 15 and 30% compared to say medicade which has an overhead of between 2 and 7%.
Its about profits and nothing else.
-
I just want to know how so many of the "poor" can afford to spend ten thousand dollars in wheels for their car, and can afford to smoke cigarettes at $5 a pack, but can't afford to buy groceries without stamps?
How does that work?
How come they can collect welfare checks by riding a bus into my state then jumping on the bus and running back to their own state?
Why does the liberal complain about the Republican not controlling the budget, yet continue to elect democratic congressmen who push immoral levels of pork into bills before them?
Why does 50% of the money I make go to taxes, and why does someone complain if they Republican try to limit the taxes needed by trying to cut federal spending? Do they think the "poor" really have a right to the money I work for?
How come the poor don't actually strive to do better, attend school, or put more effort at least into holding a job and doing well in it so they can get promoted and make more money?
Why do limousine liberals dodge paying taxex?
dago
-
Originally posted by Dago
How come the poor don't actually strive to do better, attend school, or put more effort at least into holding a job and doing well in it so they can get promoted and make more money?
dago
did you read the initial post?
why don't they attend school? did you read the part about cutting funding for student loans?
how much work would you miss if every doctor appointment involved spending half a day in the ER and then going home with your symptoms half treated.
you might be surprised how much bad health, living in high crime areas, and dependence on public transportation can effect your reliability.
if you really think the poor have it so easy, why don't you just donate all your stuff to the GOP and hop on that gravy train you see all the poor riding.
BTW- the guy with the $10K rims isn't poor he's a drug dealer. you're spot on with the cigs though. nothing pisses me off more than a guy complaining about being broke while spending $150 a month on tobacco.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
did you read the initial post?
why don't they attend school? did you read the part about cutting funding for student loans?
if you really think the poor have it so easy, why don't you just donate all your stuff to the GOP and hop on that gravy train you see all the poor riding.
How about because I put myself through college while married? How about because I went weeks without being able to buy groceries while I did it? How about the fact that I worked every day while I was in school, including weekends, and only had holidays off???
Then, how about the fact that I started at the bottom of my career field making less than minimum wage (again, while married) and gained the experience that moved me up in my career?
No, since I paid my dues, I dont think I will give it all away, nor do I think I will extend a tremendous amount of pity for anyone who has put less work into trying to secure a future than I did. I pity those who lost everything because of a natural disaster like a hurricane, at least those who had earned something to lose.
And NO, I DONT WANT MORE OF MY TAXES to SUPPORT those who dont try to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.
If someones idea of getting by is spending the day on the couch on the porch smoking, and the nights watching TV, then let them figure out a way to buy food and get medical care themselves. I dont want to pay for it.
dago
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
BTW- the guy with the $10K rims isn't poor he's a drug dealer. you're spot on with the cigs though.
Wow, if this isn't stereotyping at it's finest. This torpedoes any argument you have.
Karaya
-
Really? Did I stereotype? Did I specify any particular group or race, or did you make your own stereotypical assumption? I was just talking about the poor, where did your mind lead you to?
dago
-
Damn...they started a war on the poor and Rummy never said a word to me about it. This is the second time he never let me in on one.
-
Wrong war, wrong place, wrong time.
Oh, wait a minute, that line has been used. Sorry.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
I'd define poor by not being able to afford basic medical attention.
why is it we have no problem finding billions to fight a war to (at least today anyway, I'm sure we'll be there for a different reason if this one stops working) liberate Iraq, but we can't find the money for basic medical care for our own citizens?
we can blow up and rebuild Iraq, but my neighbor gets sick & is dying, his family's finances are devastated, all resources and efforts in the family go to wards caring for him(not sure what he has, there was some talk of naming the condition after him a few years back. not an 'honor' I'd ever want to receive). his wife and child (who moved back in to care for her parents) have to forgo medical attention since there is simply no money left after trying to keep him alive. finally after 4 or 5 years of neglecting her own health so her husband/family can survive, his wife simply has to go to the emergency room as her deteriorating health is so far gone that it can no longer be ignored, regardless of the fact that she can't afford it. her diagnosis "your cancer is systemic, if we could have diagnosed you 3 or 4 years ago we might have been able to do something for you but at this point you should focus on getting your affairs in order and spending time with your family"
the daughter may need a kidney transplant, due to damage mostly brought on by not getting basic medical attention after simple kidney infections. her mother is the most likely donor.
meanwhile he gets to live not only with his pain, reduced life, and impending demise but also with the likely hood that caring for him has killed his wife and maybe even his daughter.
this is a war, there are casualties.
"Richest Country in the World" - my ass. maybe in your neighborhood.
Maybe because.....this is not a Socialist country and life is tough sometimes. Still, this tall tale about no medical benefits being available to the poor is liberal chicken feed...know a Doctor? Ask him how indigent care is handled...they do not throw people out in the streets....btw....aren't you supposed to be apathetic?
-
Actually, I recently got an email from Senator Frist, telling me about the new $8K GRANTS they just created to give bonuses to those who get Pell GRANTS and use them to study engineering, math, science, and foreign languages. Mean old nasty Republican that he is, he sponsored the bill.
Oh, and local police and fire/rescue are just that, run local. The Feds would screw that up too given the opportunity.
Opportunites to go to school and better yourself are out there, just go look. Go to your public library and get online, the list of programs and scholarships available to the masses is astounding. If you WANT to go to school, the only thing keeping you out is YOU.
There is a huge difference between actually HELPING the poor and only making them comfortable in their poverty. The former is what to do, the latter is how to screw them over forever.
There is no war on the poor. Just more rhetoric and bull****, if you swallow it or parrot it, you aren't helping anyone, especially the poor.
-
apathy... no... health care is not better suited to be....how did you say it? "universally provided"
the examples you gave were incorrect also.... fire and police are locally provided not federal.... evne so...
police do not protect anyone from rape or crime unless they happen to be there at the time. their job is to fill out the forms after the crime has taken place. as far as theft or injury or property damage.... they do nothing but take reports... your property is restored by PRIVATE insurace companies.
fire... fire departments and police could easily be privatized and probly will be in the future. fire departments may or may not put out a fire... it depends... Insurance companies will make you whole again after the fire either way tho.
the military is a perfect example of waste but it is the only thing that the government should do... the waste is acceptable and provbided for in our constitution... it is expected that armies and war will be wasteful.
so what do the feds provide without competition that they do a good job at? social Security?
You want streamlined drug process...will you accept a few thousand thalidimide babies every once in a while tho? Will you accept health care that you can't sue the doctor (that you didn't choose) if he screws up? Will you accept british dental work?
lazs
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Actually, I recently got an email from Senator Frist, telling me about the new $8K GRANTS they just created to give bonuses to those who get Pell GRANTS and use them to study engineering, math, science, and foreign languages. Mean old nasty Republican that he is, he sponsored the bill.
Oh, and local police and fire/rescue are just that, run local. The Feds would screw that up too given the opportunity.
Opportunites to go to school and better yourself are out there, just go look. Go to your public library and get online, the list of programs and scholarships available to the masses is astounding. If you WANT to go to school, the only thing keeping you out is YOU.
There is a huge difference between actually HELPING the poor and only making them comfortable in their poverty. The former is what to do, the latter is how to screw them over forever.
There is no war on the poor. Just more rhetoric and bull****, if you swallow it or parrot it, you aren't helping anyone, especially the poor.
Actually I won several million dollars in the Florida lottery and I don't have to do doo doo. :D
-
When is somebody going to trot out the poor homeless in the country and moan how the Republicans are ignoring them? Arent we due for that?
When the GB the first was president, the press couldnt blather on enough about the homeless and how the administration was all to blame for them, etc etc. Constantly on the news. Then, the day Clinton took office, it seems all homeless suddenly ceased to exist, as the press never mentioned them again, I mean after all, what would have been the point, the Republicans weren't holding the Presidency so who could they blame?
Why does the coverage of some of these issue become so dramatic when you can try and place blame on Republicans, but seem not to exist the very day the demodorks take office?
Selective coverage of issues? Could it be?
dago
-
More likely ADD audience.
-
Originally posted by moot
More likely ADD audience.
If the audience voted on or choose the story, maybe. But that isn't how it works now is it?
No, the press too often has an extreme bias and uses their positions to serve that bias.
Here is a suggestion, if you think not enough is being done to help the poor, donate 50% of your after tax earnings to a charity that helps the poor. Just dont demand I do that same.
-
The media plays what the audience buys.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
why do I have to pay (signifigantly more btw) for a war in Iraq against people who've never been a problem for me? why is it that their schools, and hospitals are a priority over mine when spending my money?
Because if we rebuild their country to out specifications, includeing schools Hospitals, economy, and politics, then we can pump the countr dry of all its oil.
-
Originally posted by dmf
Because if we rebuild their country to out specifications, includeing schools Hospitals, economy, and politics, then we can pump the countr dry of all its oil.
I'd rather just let them pump their own oil and spend their own dime to build their country.
-
Since 9/11, our military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have totaled 352 BILLION dollars, that seems like a lot. However, in the same time span, we have some something like 3 TRILLION on entitlements. Lemme dig up the link
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20051227-120942-8934r.htm
Entitlements' growth seen gobbling budget ASSOCIATED PRESS
Three growing entitlement programs consumed nearly half of all federal spending in 2004, and budget analysts expect them to make up an even bigger share in the future.
Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid accounted for more than $1 trillion in the 2004 budget year, according to the Consolidated Federal Funds Report being released today by the Census Bureau.
Overall, federal spending was $2.2 trillion, an increase of 5 percent from 2003.
"The total federal spending increase is actually down a bit from recent years," said Gerard Keffer, chief of the Census Bureau's federal programs branch. "It had been running 6 [percent] to 8 percent in the past several years."
For years, Washington has been fighting over how to manage the growth of entitlement programs. Analysts think the fight will continue for years to come.
"I think it's absolutely essential and inevitable that we are going to reform those programs," said Rudolph Penner, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute, a social-issues research organization. "How, is another question. There's very little interest, now."
President Bush has pushed to overhaul Social Security and establish private accounts, but Congress has balked.
Critics argue that private accounts would do nothing to slow the growth of Social Security spending -- unless benefits are cut, a politically unpopular option.
Spending on Medicare, the federal health insurance program for the elderly, is set to increase with the introduction of a prescription-drug benefit in January.
The federal government estimates that it will spend about $724 billion over 10 years to provide the Medicare drug benefit.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,179552,00.html
Congress OKs Defense Spending
Thursday, December 22, 2005
WASHINGTON — The House passed a $453.3 billion defense spending bill Thursday, including $50 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and other funding such as for rebuilding after Hurricane Katrina.
The bill, which now goes to President Bush for his signature, was approved by the Senate Wednesday after Democrats forced the Republican majority to strip from it a measure opening up an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling.
The $50 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars is to carry the Pentagon until Congress acts on another emergency war supplemental next year, which lawmakers expect to be from $80 billion to $100 billion.
It is estimated that the Pentagon is spending about $6 billion a month on the Iraq war effort.
The military spending bill contains $29 billion to rebuild levees, schools, roads and other infrastructure destroyed in August when Hurricane Katrina swept through Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
I'd rather just let them pump their own oil and spend their own dime to build their country.
But then we wouldn't have to pay higher taxes to fund the Kinder Gentler World.
-
War on the poor is a concept often used here in Alabama to get taxpayers to vote more taxes. Thing is, the last ballot stated all the money would go into a "rainy day fund." It was not earmarked for education specifically, but was to go into a general fund to be used as needed, anywhere needed. This billion and a half dollar tax amendment was voted down and rightfully so. Anyone reading the ballot with that wording would vote that measure down.
This tax would have amounted to an ad valorem tax on everything, including services (oil changes or car repair for example) all the way to fallow land areas used for hunting purposes. Alabama's economy depends greatly on the hunting industry, which would have been diminished because of a doubling of property taxes on this land had the amendment passed. This is timberland. It would all be immediately cut down and developed into suburbia imo, since the proposed taxes would have treated it as commercial property.
Does anyone think adding taxes onto every service, gallon of gas, etc. is going to help the poor????
At least the ballot was truthful with its general fund language. People want accountability and want to know where their taxes are being spent. The powers that be are always attempting to trick the public by one way or another. Problem for them here in Alabama is most thinking folks see through their ploys.
What bothers me is very educated people support what I call extreme taxation, without thinking about the way amendments are worded, the wording being up front and honest. This tax money (billion and a half dollars) will be spent as we see fit when and where it's needed most.
Les
-
entitlements never end they just grow in scope and complexity and cost over the years.... they never go away because they don't solve the problem they set out to.... they grow it.
someone said that entitlements make the people "comfortable in their poverty"... I think that is a profound statement... making someone feel completley shameless about their failures and allowing them to live as well as people who struggle is unfair to both groups of people. It creates a "what's the use" attitude and increases the ranks of those who would do nothing but chirp with their beaks open like little baby birds.
instead of food stamps.... the "poor" are issued debit cards to buy groceries with. Wouldn't want anyone to know that they are living off other peoples sweat would we?
lazs