E-mail Story
Print Story
There are 101 comments - Display All Comments
Hugh_Bric
e
Rocehster, MN
Posted on 11/12/2009 at 8:37:59 PM
I want better and more affordable health care for everyone.
Unfortunately, Obamacare will make things much worse.
If they have to vote on a bill at midnight on a Saturday you know there is something wrong.
apollo13
rochester, mn
Posted on 11/12/2009 at 9:01:05 PM
And if it doesn’t go into effect until 2013; there is something really bad with it!
kscrib200
0
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/12/2009 at 9:15:06 PM
People better wake up to this healthcare. If it is so great, why does it exempt the Senate and House? Silly question.
Puritanni
calRoches
rochester, mn
Posted on 11/12/2009 at 9:29:06 PM
Anyone else find it odd the pro-Obama folks had to ship professional protesters in, while the side of freedom-loving people were all local people?
Atilla
Rochester, Mn
Posted on 11/12/2009 at 11:31:45 PM
“The number one cause of bankruptcy in the country is health costs,” she said.”
wrong.
The number one cause of bankruptcy is loss of income related to unemployment.
Illness can be a factor in losing your job.
Along with job loss can come loss of health insurance, but not necessarily.
Combine those factors with poor debt management (include most Americans) - or any other significant debt.
Long term coverage is key, as well as long term disability. Don’t skimp out on saving $50-$100 bucks a month - just in case disaster strikes.
Spend a good amount of time reading your health benefits book. Most people are clueless as to what their benefits are.
marcus559
01
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/12/2009 at 11:34:32 PM
“Anyone else find it odd the pro-Obama folks had to ship professional protesters in, while the side of freedom-loving people were all local people?” I find it odd that you find anything in the article to support that statement. Let’s see, one lady is from Roseville. And, BTW, I like freedom too, and I’m liberal who finds the tea party people to be appallingly ill-informed.
Othelmo__
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/12/2009 at 11:59:55 PM
Radmann’s sign actually read “Billionaires for Wealthcare”
And, yes, all eight(!) MoveOners were from out of town. How embarrassing that the Tea Party Patriots brought out 70 people to demonstrate over their lunch hour on a crisp, windy Thursday and all the opposition could muster was eight professional protesters.
GOP507
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 1:16:39 AM
The one rally I attended they didn’t seam “ill-informed”. Please enlighten us with YOUR great and powerful wisdom marcus.
Kate
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 3:40:29 AM
I am so sick of the biased reporting. Tiny violins and sob story for the pro-Obama out-of-towners. Big black SWAT truck for the patriots. I know the guy who owns the truck, he’s a nice man. He is exercising free speech.
Obama was asked by a reporter last week if people will go to jail if they don’t pay. As usual, he didn’t directly answer the question but he wouldn’t deny it.
Are you hearing this people? You will go to jail if you will not or cannot pay. If that doesn’t wake people up I don’t know what will.
Kate
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 5:53:53 AM
There is another rally this Saturday at the same location starting at 10:00 am. Please join us to fight against this healthcare bill. If you are not informed or concerned—you will be once you’ve had the opportunity to discuss this with Tea Party Patriots.
jared
kasson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 5:56:10 AM
Kate do you have to buy car insurance here in minnesota?
aghast
jefferson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 6:01:51 AM
Is force compatible with freedom?
Would you rather be free or enslaved?
aghast
jefferson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 6:34:19 AM
Why do folks trust the big mugwumps in government to protect their health?
The following is no exaggeration or conspiracy theory.
In an official 1994 government report by Frank C. Conahan, Assistant Comptroller General, National Security and International Affairs Division regarding Human Experimentation we find such statements as the following.
“According to a CIA official, from 1553 to about 1964, the CIAconducted a series of experiments called MKULTRA to test vulnerabilities to behavior modification drugs. As a part of these experiments, LSD and other psychochemical drugs were administered to an undetermined number of people without their knowledge or consent.”
Also, “between 1949 and 1969, the Army conducted several hundred biological warfare tests in which unaware populations were sprayed with bacterial tracers or simulants that the Army thought were harmless at that time. Some of the tests involved spraying large areas, such as the cities of St. Louis and San Francisco, and others involved spraying more focused areas, such as the New York City subway system and Washington National Airport.”
“ In another Army experiment conducted between 1959 and 1974, approximately 2,200 volunteers were exposed to biological pathogens, such as Venezuelan Equine Encephalitis and Tularemia…[and were never informed properly regarding the risks.]”
Read the whole thing at http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat2/152601.pdf
letsplayh
ockey
roch, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 6:45:09 AM
jared—are you mandated to buy a car in minnesota???
manonthem
on
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 6:47:31 AM
I agree. PB is way to liberal. That’s why I don’t purchase liberal media in any way. I use it for free and hope they go out of business or start delivering the news not having a bias. I also don’t watch KTTC another PRO-Liberal outlet.
jared
kasson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:02:25 AM
We do not all own cars, but we all have bodies… Yes?
So I will ask again, if you own a car, is it required to have insurance?
letsplayh
ockey
roch, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:10:57 AM
jared—-not exactly how you asked it the first time.
anyway—-owning a car is a choice—-a free choice to all.
once you choose to own a car in minnesota—yes you are required to carry insurance to cover the “other” person or people and their property.
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:14:29 AM
jared if the gubbemint decided to tax the air you breathe, how would you feel about that?
jared
kasson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:18:40 AM
How would I feel?
ummmm very sad....
Ok..
Back to healthcare.
Under the current model, more and more are not covered every year. Insurance premiums have more than doubled in the last ten years. Deductibles have increased and covered items and procedures have decreased.
The system needs to be reformed.
How?
That is open to debate!
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:23:14 AM
Would you feel bad if they used the proceeds to “purify” the air for health reasons?
Now, back to auto insurance…
letsplayh
ockey
roch, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:25:28 AM
jared—will agree with that statement.
here is the problem—if you think the government can fix the problem or make it better then i think you are sadly mistaken.
name me one program the government is involved in that works.
healthcare by the government will be a disaster at a very high price.
the government does not care about your health—-it cares about having complete control and power over you and all of us.
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:26:58 AM
Gubbermint sponsored healthcare will be as ethical and efficient as gubbermint sponsored warfare.
Atilla
Rochester, Mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:30:35 AM
Toni Radmann of Roseville look to be at least 60 years old.
So that 10 year old brother that had cancer - that must have been in the 1950’s, or 60’s.
Medicare and Medicaid programs initiated during the administration of Lyndon B. Johnson routinely extended good medical care to the poor and the elderly for the first time in history.
In the 50’s health care costs were kept low because people paid cash when they went to the doctor. Nothing was “free”:
http://www.oftwominds.com/blogjuly09/healthcare07-09.html
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:33:34 AM
People die from old age, accidents and disease.
How many die from “Aninsuranceitis?”
Lack of insurance does not cause death.
jared
kasson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:35:28 AM
Plenty of government programs work and benefit people. You know that. Does every program work?
no
Does every program succeed 100%?
no
Should all government program exist?
no
Now, back to healthcare. Should it be a single payor system?
no (inefficient, no competition, no innovation, etc)
Should there be a public option?
yes
PS, jzee, I am sorry but everything is not a conspiracy or an inside job. Take the blinders off.
aghast
jefferson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:37:56 AM
If I have to work harder to make ends meet because I’m forced to buy “health” insurance, and get stressed out and die earlier,how do I or society benefit?
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:41:35 AM
“I am sorry but everything is not a conspiracy or an inside job”
I never said that.
However, most everything the gubbermint does is an expensive scam.
Most of what it does is parasitic. How healthy is that?
PS Did you happen to read the post above by aghast? And you want those people to manage your health care?
letsplayh
ockey
roch, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:42:15 AM
no—-back to your original question—-car insurance.
i am required to carry car insurance if i “choose” to own a vehicle. i am required to carry insurance at my expense.
i do not expect or want the government to supply my auto insurance for me.
i do not expect or want the govenment to be involved with my health insurance either.
letsplayh
ockey
roch, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:50:04 AM
which government program work as planned and within budget??????
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:52:42 AM
I want a gubbermint chauffer to take me to the free health clinic.
Yikes! That scenario actually exists, here, today.
But not for a dumb chump like me! I get to pay for the freebies! yipppeee!
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:55:13 AM
Even if gubbermit pogroms …er programs worked ideally , they’d still involve forced payments from the productive classes.
That don’t equal freedom in my book.
mldenney
Byron, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 8:27:46 AM
Here’s my healthcare plan, which my employer highly considered but current tax laws made it too expensive:
1. Employees pay into a healthcare account, tax free. Employer can contribute as well as part of their benefits program. Perhaps the contributions to your plan have a small tax to help cover the unemployed/underemployed.
2. When you have a Dr’s bill, it gets paid out of that account.
3. If the account goes negative, it’s now a loan (backed by the employer if they are large enough, or the govt, or an association of smaller employers, etc)
4. When you die, you either have money to pass on to your next of kin, or a debt that comes out of your estate.
5. Nobody tells you what is covered or not...it’s your money and you decide.
6. Employer donations could be based on employee getting age appropriate checkups, quitting smoking, losing weight, excercising, etc.
Fire away.
red_dog
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 8:48:35 AM
MLDENNY: I like your concept. There will still need to be some minimal amounts that will be required in your account for this to work. I also like the idea of the leftover money to go towards next of kin. If they don’t use it, then it can be coverted to income and taxed as long as they have sufficient funds in their own medical account, or not in arrears.
Good concept though!
Mrs_C
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:19:59 AM
Keep in mind “Freedom-Loving-People”, unless you have a Union Contract where you are employewd, your employer can change your Health Insurance coverage at any time without your consent. Your employer can decide having Health Insurance coverage is just too expensive. Or you could be laid off due to downsizing.
Where would you all be then if that were to happen?
letsplayh
ockey
roch, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:24:05 AM
oh—and i guess our trustworthy government would never change the game plan?
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:28:30 AM
Now the very idea of freedom, itself, is being disparaged.
Oh, how far we’ve come, komradz!
☭
Mrs_C
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:30:06 AM
Employers would be the first to eliminate Health Care coverage for employees. Or have it be more it more expensive so that employees would have to make up cost difference, thus resulting in less take home pay.
With Healtrh Insurance premiums going up 4 times or more fast than the Inflation rate, figure it out!
letsplayh
ockey
roch, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:32:56 AM
and our country is broke—-figure it out
aghast
jefferson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:42:04 AM
Mrs C, I would be interested in your evaluation of my comment posted at 6:34, above.
Also remember the Tuskegee (sp) airman’s experience with experiments.
How can you trust these people?
Mrs_C
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:44:09 AM
And how do you supposed that happened?
-Giving close to a Trillion dollars to Big Pharma and the Health Insurers for the so-called Medicare D Health and Drug Covwerage?
-Invading a country on false intelligence 6 years ago, puring countless billions into said war?
-Giving the rich a $1.3 Trillion Tax cut?
-Giving Wall Street $750 Billion last Septrember that is now being regretted as a mistake?
Yeah, this country went broke before a few years ago.
aghast
jefferson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:46:35 AM
And how can you trust these people?
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:49:09 AM
mrs C, you just gave some fine examples of how untrustworhty they are.
“How can you trust those people?”
Beautiful. Exactly.
theblueca
t
Roch, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:49:11 AM
Our health care industry has priced people out of health care. People need both access and lower costs. Private health care insurance has an ave. of 26% overhead cost, with some companies insurance at 40%. Executives make millions. If well off corporations are willing to pay these #’s for their employees, why should the private insurers offer competitive prices for the less wealthy? They have it good.
Over the last 10-20 years there has been a dramatic increase in bankruptcies due to health care costs, as well as a big increase in death due to no insurance. I used to be in a position to review credit histories. And it was shocking to see professionals at a certain business here in town show up with credit histories revealing unpaid er visits across the midwest for their families. We all pay for these unpaid bills and bankruptcies.
Multiple research shows the increase in death due to NO INSURANCE. The latest being the Sept. 2009 Harvard Study, showing an extra 45,000 deaths in the US due to no insurance.
Factcheck.org:
“Now, on to the tough question: Is the 45,000 figure accurate? We can’t say for sure, but scores of other studies also conclude that persons without health insurance have a higher chance of dying prematurely than those with health insurance. A committee headed by Dr. John Z. Ayanian of the National Academies’ Institute of Medicine reviewed nearly 100 such studies released since 2002. And in March he summed up the findings for Congress this way:
Ayanian’s testimony to Congress, March 2009: Uninsured Americans frequently delay or forgo doctors’ visits, prescription medications, and other effective treatments, even when they have serious disease or life-threatening conditions. … Because uninsured adults seek health care less often than insured adults, they are often unaware of health problems such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol, or early-stage cancer. Uninsured adults are also much less likely to receive vaccinations, cancer screening services such as mammography and colonoscopy, and other effective preventive services.
The 45,000 estimate is at the high end of estimates, but earlier studies also have put the number of excess deaths from lack of insurance coverage in the thousands:
A 1993 examination of 1971 through 1987 data on 25- to 74-year-olds from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey found a 25 percent higher risk of mortality for the uninsured compared with the insured, after adjusting for various factors, such as age, smoking, alcohol consumption, obesity, education and income. The study, by lead researcher Peter Franks, was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
In 2002, the Institute of Medicine, basing its work on the Franks study and another examining Current Population Survey data, found that 18,000 people (age 25 to 64) died because they lacked health insurance in 2000. (Ayanian added in his testimony that for those with heart disease or cancer and without health insurance, the risk of death for the uninsured could be 40 percent to 50 percent higher.)
In 2008, the Urban Institute updated the IOM numbers, using later Census Bureau estimates on the uninsured. It found that in 2006, the number who died because of a lack of insurance was 22,000. The Urban Institute also said that the IOM figure “may have underestimated the number of deaths” by trying to calculate different mortality-rate differences for each age group, an approach the Urban Institute said wasn’t well grounded in the research. Applying a mortality-rate difference to the entire population under study produced an even higher number, 27,000.
The latest report by Harvard researchers used the methodology of IOM but more recent data. It found that the uninsured are 40 percent more likely to die prematurely. And it expanded the age group a bit, estimating that among adults age 18 to 64, there were 35,327 deaths linked to a lack of insurance in 2005. Calculating the estimate without a breakdown by age group increased the figure to 44,789.
A 2007 report published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine examined data for adults age 45 to 64 from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study, sponsored by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, finding that the uninsured had a 26 percent higher mortality.
A 2004 study published in the journal Health Affairs looked at data for those age 55 to 64 in the Health and Retirement Survey. It controlled for socioeconomic factors and found the uninsured in the group had a 3 percent higher risk of dying over an eight-year period. The study called uninsurance the third leading cause of death for that age group, saying that more than 13,000 yearly deaths “may be attributable to the present lack of insurance coverage among the near-elderly.”
Lack of insurance causes tens of thousands of extra deaths each year in the US.
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:52:23 AM
“Lack of insurance causes tens of thousands of extra deaths each year in the US.”
I’d like to see that listed on a Death Certificate!
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:53:34 AM
I’ve gone for decades without health insurance.
It hasn’t caused my death yet!
Kate
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 9:55:42 AM
Yes, I own a car but that doesn’t make the comparison valid. As a matter of fact I have an old beater and pay liability/medical. It is inexpensive and protects anyone that might be hurt as well as the other car.
We do not have any choice in the type of coverage we now purchase in medical insurance in the state of MN as is. The state mandates what the policy can cover which makes it very expensive. I do not have insurance right now, but if I had a stable job I would want a high deductible policy which covers catastrophic events along with an HSA (health savings account) for routine or less expensive procedures.
I don’t remember being threatened with incarceration if I don’t carry auto insurance.
I have been laid off for a long time. We cannot afford insurance so if this goes through I guess I will go to jail and probably lose my home. Apparently some people are okay with that. I would never wish that on a fellow American.
I have only had insurance for about 9 years during my adult life. I have paid all my medical bills even if I had to make monthly payments. I see no crisis.
Mrs_C
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:00:21 AM
In those decades you have gone without Health Insurance, jzee, how many times have you had Complete checkups with tests to amke sure you don’t have High Cholesterol, Diabetes, High Blood Pressure, Cancer, and otehr ailments you might not know about?? ANd what has that cost you out of pocket, including medications?
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:02:00 AM
Kate, are you telling me that you’re still alive after all those years without health (rip off) insurance?
I keep hearing that lack of it causes death.How’d you do it?
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:10:29 AM
Mrs C, I’ve spent a small fortune (cash) on my teeth becuase that’s of value to me.
Most of the rest yer talking about is bogus in my opinion. I’ve spent very little on it.
I avoid medicine like the plague.
I check my own BP from time to time.
The way i figger it, I’m terminal anyway, so why make some medic rich off my paranoia?
They say that we could dump DC and all the politicians into the ocean and we’d be much better off for it though the fish would suffer.
I have a similar opinion of medicines, doctors, lawyers, investment advisers, generals, talking heads, insurance agents and all the rest of the so called “experts.”
I ain’t dead yet.
BTW: The issue is freedom. It’s not about me, so please refrain from personalizing it in the future. Besides, I’m a private type guy, hence the anonymity.
Sorry to the rest of you folk for revealing myself. I was just answering her question.
Jewels1
C Town, Mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:14:27 AM
Did you know if you can’t find your insurance card and you need to go to the hospitial they can turn you away. This happen to us in Calif. when we were there for a wedding in the family. My mother fell very ill on the ride out there we found a hospital only to be told they could not help us because we could not find her insurance card. They told us she was dieing. I finally found it stuck behind another card. They then took her in. Just to let people know that if we had no insurance my mom would of died that night. So yes you can die without ins. The hospital said that it is there policy. Many of you people who think they have all the answers, or know every thing should really do more research and find out what the real world is like. I think 90% of the people who think they know so much need to do alot more research to know what really goes on. That includes health care. Don’t listen to other people do your own reseach and learn more for yourself. I think we need a new health care plan. I have good insurance and I am lucky but there are so many who don’t.
Jewels1
C Town, Mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:18:16 AM
jezz I think you are very lucky that you have not been ill. For your sake I hope you never have cancer or any other illness and no health care place to go to.
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:19:44 AM
Mom, bless her heart, could have died even with insurance.
Had she died, the cause of death would have been “Lack of an insurance card.”
Proof that it’s the lack of a card that causes death, not lack of insurance.
I’m gonna make me a card right away. Izzat legal? I’ll put on it “Self Insured. Cash.”
Atilla
Rochester, Mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:24:28 AM
Mrs_C,
“checkups with tests to amke sure you don’t have High Cholesterol, Diabetes, High Blood Pressure, Cancer..”
And now 0boma’s health council is running around saying the “value of cancer screening is OVERSTATED.”
It is very easy AND cost effective to go to a retail based clinic for routine physicals and testing.
Even Walmart has a clinic, and they are extremely reasonable.
Walmart has $50 office visits, but those unable to pay will be treated anyway:
http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/128773.html
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:25:10 AM
jewels, the insurance companies are betting that I won’t get sick.
I know more about myself than they do, so why shouldn’t I be even more inclined to bet that way?
How’s the proverb go? Time and chance catch up with all of us,eventually. That’s life, that’s the way it is. No biggie. I’m not agonizing over it.
Insurance is largely a racket.
BillChris
topher
Olmsted County, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:29:14 AM
Technically, you don’t need to license or insure a vehicle, w/o a lien against it, if you only operate it on private property in MN.
If you are in town, it would have to stay in a garage, not parked on the street however practical that would be in that instance.
What you can’t do w/ car insurance is use it to pay oil changes, engine repair, new tires or try to purchase and get collision coverage to reimburse you after you’ve had a collision.
Atilla
Rochester, Mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:34:29 AM
Mrs_C,
You were against Booosh’s expansion of medicare?
Teddy Kennedy wore it and all the libbies lubbed it!
Of course AARP endorsed this DFL expansion of gummint.
“Giving the rich a $1.3 Trillion Tax cut?”
(how quickly you forgot about all the “rebates” given to people who do not even pay taxes).
And thanks to those Booosh tax cuts (like Reagan’s tax cuts) the economy grew, small business hired employees like crazy and
Bush extracted more money from the wealthy than any other US president in History.
Tax cuts given to the economic engines of America work like a charm, and they work EVERY TIME!
http://online.wsj.com/public/
article_print/SB121659695380368965.html
Read it.
It proves the Bush tax cuts caused the largest tax revenue in US History.
Bush extracted more money from the wealthy than any other US president in History.
Atilla
Rochester, Mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:37:09 AM
I see also Mrs_C you neglect to mention TARP II, and the stimu=less.
It’s obvious who made the economy go broke, and they are STILL breaking it.
............Expect another union pay-off stimu=less after Christmas.
sbintn
Murfreesboro, TN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:40:20 AM
BTW Jewls1, on Tuesday, my daughter went to the doctor and didn’t have her insurance card. Prior to her visit, I called Blue Cross and they provided me with the numbers along with their phone number for providers. The rep at the Blues told me if there were any problems at the doctors office, to have them call and Blue Cross would get it taken care of.
At the pharmacy, I paid the full price for the prescription because I did not have the card but the next day they refunded all but my copay when I returned with the card.
The problem was not the doctors office, insurance company or the pharmacy, it was my daughter’s for forgetting her purse at home.
Atilla
Rochester, Mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:44:43 AM
0boma and the unions (and Soros) are intentionally trying to break the economy.
Why would Andy Stern have 22 visits to the White House?
Stern has said many times
“One World, One Union” in his quest to form that one biiiig world wide union he desires.
And 0boma believes the government and the union are the best ways to redistribute wealth to the world.
It’s going to be a lousy X-mas, which is just the excuse they need to pass another union/private enterprise destroying stimu=less.
Atilla
Rochester, Mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:46:17 AM
That should be union LOVING/private enterprise destroying stimu=less.
rochfan
rochester, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 10:58:00 AM
Don’t worry. IF the bill goes through without fixing the reimbursement rates to the efficient and quality providers like our SE Mn clinics, the problem of access to care goes away and turns into lack of availability of quality care. Then insurance cards, cash, whatever payment method you offer can’t buy what won’t be there.
aghast
jefferson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 11:10:38 AM
Atilla, good call on Andy Stern.
The health care debate is all about consolidating wealth and power, just like jzee keeps harping about.
Stern is considered one of the topp 1oo most influential people in the health care debate.
He consolidated power in several unions and now is poised to do that with health.
It’s all a huge power grab and even union leaders can see it coming.
“Stern demanded a corporate-style consolidation of the AFL-CIO’s 58 unions into 20 unions, in order to give each streamlined organization more power.
He also called for massive and well-funded organizing drives to combat waning membership.
Cleland, Nancy, “Union Leader Calls for AFL-CIO Changes,” The Los Angeles Times, November 11, 2004
This didn’t win him many fans in the labor movement. ‘‘He’s trying to implement dictatorial rule,” Tom Buffenbarger, president of the union that represents machinists and aerospace workers, told the New York Times in 2005. ‘‘He’s trying to corporatize the labor movement.”
Atilla
Rochester, Mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 12:54:26 PM
One more point for sister _C.
After the so called by Politico 0boma “spending binge”, the White House now says it will focus on “deficits.”
Bwaahahahahahaha hohohohoho
lol...............
Nothin like locking the barn door after all the horses are released!
OnlyTheTr
uth
MN, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 1:09:54 PM
So people are complaining they get refused, because they were too lazy to carry their insurance card?
Gimme a break.
I’d like them to get into and of a country, because they said to Customs, “Oh I left my passport at home.” Can I say STUPID, without being censored?
Same for leaving your driver’s license at home.
Same for leaving your cab card at home. Same for leaving your cash card/checkbook at home.
Can I say, “Doofus?”
I suppose the people who leave all these cards behind, wear pocketless jogging pants, because wearing pants with pockets is s-o-o-o uncool.
For females and gender changers not having such documents in their purse, don’t bother crying me a river.
mldenney
Byron, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 3:55:44 PM
OnlyTheTruth,
Wow...you’re cold. Lighten up.
As for my plan I listed earlier...anyone care to weigh in. Got one positive response. Or is everyone having too much fun arguing politics rather than brainstorming real ideas?
irishman
Rochester, Mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 4:07:54 PM
mldenney: I went back and read your suggestions.
Off the top we disagree, A-Z. I want employers out of healthcare. No job, change of job, looking for a job? I don’t want those variables in my healthcare.
Nationwide products, pay on my own, lower my premium, I will handle this on my own.
mldenney
Byron, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 4:46:13 PM
Metal,
It helps with the rising cost several ways:
1. The patient has a vested interest in keeping costs low. So hopefully they’re scrutinizing and not getting that extra procedure just because insurance pays for it.
2. The insurance management is greatly simplified.
3. Healthcare providers will more likely get paid on time.
4. Getting people healthy is the best way to reduce costs. An employer incentive is a great way to change peoples habits without forcing them.
Irishman,
This account would be in your name and is not something your employer owns. So it would go with you. And I’m not saying traditional insurance should go away; I guess if you want that you should have that as a choice. I would rather have them out of the picture…
marcus559
01
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 6:50:41 PM
“Tax cuts given to the economic engines of America work like a charm, and they work EVERY TIME!” - Atilla, you have apparently forgotten that Reagan reversed course on the tax cuts after the deficits exploded. That was one of his more reasonable actions. I voted for the guy but lived to regret it. It is largely his legacy that the country is now littered with people whose ability to think is limited to “gubbmit bad bad bad, can’t do ANYTHING right”, and “free market good good good - does EVERYTHING right”. You could roll up all the thousands and thousands of posts on the PB website, distill them through some indexing software, and that silly statement is about as deep as the resulting content would be.
marcus559
01
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 6:58:23 PM
To all you people who see socialism, communism, or nazism behind everything coming out of the White House lately, can I assume you are also against socialized policing? Socialized fire fighting? Socialized infrastructure and socialized public health protection? Socialized air-traffic control? Socialized military defense? There are so many libertarians on this site, I’m almost afraid of your answers.
aghast
jefferson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:00:01 PM
“It is largely his legacy that the country is now littered with people whose ability to think is limited to “gubbmit bad bad bad...”
Wrong wrong wrong.
That argument goes back to
aghast
jefferson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:00:54 PM
the time when governments first existed.
And not only that, but that’s what it boils down to.
marcus559
01
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:05:52 PM
GOP507 - “Please enlighten us with YOUR great and powerful wisdom marcus.” My wisdom, such as it is, is that you cannot have an intelligent discussion with people who equate a public healthcare option with nazi death camps. You cannot have an intelligent discussion with people who think that endlessly repeating incorrect and frankly ignorant anecdotes about Canadian (or French, British, Swiss, Japanese, etc.) healthcare constitutes some facsimile of reason. You cannot have an intelligent discussion with anyone who thinks that Michelle Bachmann is an intelligent person. There is a great and growing gulf in this country between those with knowledge and reason, and those with fiery opinions crafted for them by bloviating television bomb-throwers.
marcus559
01
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:06:53 PM
Aghast - not sure what you meant… can you restate that?
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:07:21 PM
“You could roll up all the thousands and thousands of posts on the PB website, distill them through some indexing software...”
The reason is that it doesn’t need to get any more complicated than the fact that people in power invariably abuse it to one degree or another.
It has to be constantly repeated because people simply don’t get even that simple concept.
The free market is not perfect, but it is better than any economic invention so far.
aghast
jefferson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:11:30 PM
It wasn’t Reagan’s legacy that caused people to “think government bad bad bad.”
It’s an ancient concept.
I voted for him too, and both Bush’s, but would not do it again.
Big government truly is bad bad bad, no matter who controls it.
marcus559
01
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:13:54 PM
Jzee - I agree with you that the free market is the best system overall. I just disagree with the simplified laissez-faire extremes that are frequently touted here (on this site, I mean). A free-market without any rules or safety nets is nothing more than the law of the jungle unleashed. Regulation and safety nets require some reasonable amount of taxation, that’s just one of the inevitable but regrettable facts of life.
aghast
jefferson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:17:23 PM
The main difficulty with the free market is that it doesn’t stay free for long.
Humans, being what they are, will always find a way to gum up the most perfect of mechanisms.
It’s sheer folly to imagine that adding government to the mix will make things fairer in the long run.
marcus559
01
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:19:26 PM
Aghast - true, Reagan didn’t do it all himself. But I think that millions of conservatives think of Saint Ron every time they repeat the catechism: “Goverment isn’t the solution; government is THE PROBLEM!” It’s pithy and catchy, and I even agree with it up to a point, but it is not a substitute for reason or caring. I like to hear arguments based upon reason and data, not old aphorisms.
letsplayh
ockey
roch, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:22:56 PM
mldenney—
maybe your plan would work for checkups and office visits or meds—but please explain how you are going to get enough into this account for the cost of a surgical procedure or a major illness. it may take about a 1/4 million if your luck isn’t so good—and with bad luck—maybe a million will do.
i have had both===and it would have wiped out most of my lifes savings.
if the account goes negative and you die after surgery or a major illness—i highly doubt your estate is going to cover the cost.
so are you going to saddle your family with the debt?
i have good insurance—and i paid very little for my surgery/illness—which there were two each.
for the others:
i do not want our government involved in my health care in any way.
i agree with several others—-this is nothing short of a power grab by the government—and that is all there is to it.
and the other point—the government has a very good record of failure to anything they get involved in.
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:25:57 PM
Marcus, I understand what you’re getting at, but it’s another of the eternal problems.
There is no perfect answer.
We are simply doomed to struggle on as best we can.
The trick seems to be keeping some from gaining too much power. It’s a constant struggle because there’s always someone who figures he’s beyond the rules, and if he can skirt them just a little, he’ll come out ahead..
That’s just the way it is.
You really ought to look into the libertarian concepts. There is a lot of merit there.
We’ve been taught to fear chaos, but in reality,it’s a largely irrational fear.
I hope you don’t think I’m trying to preach...just trying to answer your questions.
aghast
jefferson, mn
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:51:59 PM
“It’s pithy and catchy, and I even agree with it up to a point, but it is not a substitute for reason or caring. I like to hear arguments based upon reason and data, not old aphorisms.”
I agree completely. The dearth of analysis on display here is often shocking. Almost discouraging.
Moppit
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:55:44 PM
I am local, and for public option. Unfortunately I could not make the rally, because I have a job that makes other people (Who enjoy their “cadillac” health care coverage) rich. If I were to show up, my job which grosses about 400/wk, of which 90/wk is health insurance (thank god Im covered) may be in jeopardy. I Support public health option, I think the tea party people are hopelessly uninformed (and many of them I personally believe are paid to blog on behalf of industries). And, Even though I have insurance, I find that the price of health-care and the hippocratic oath which many doctors take are in conflict. Last but not least, My biggest gripe, is That even though I pay approx 360/month through my employer for family medical insurance, The Mayo Clinic is not in network - So I am forced to go to OMC which by the way is a pretty good clinic. But for 360/month with a 10% deductible, I would like to be able to choose where I go.. Thank you, And go Public Option. I Support (Even though I have to work and may not be able to attend the rallies) Of those congressmen and senator’s that are FOR public option.
Moppit
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:55:49 PM
I am local, and for public option. Unfortunately I could not make the rally, because I have a job that makes other people (Who enjoy their “cadillac” health care coverage) rich. If I were to show up, my job which grosses about 400/wk, of which 90/wk is health insurance (thank god Im covered) may be in jeopardy. I Support public health option, I think the tea party people are hopelessly uninformed (and many of them I personally believe are paid to blog on behalf of industries). And, Even though I have insurance, I find that the price of health-care and the hippocratic oath which many doctors take are in conflict. Last but not least, My biggest gripe, is That even though I pay approx 360/month through my employer for family medical insurance, The Mayo Clinic is not in network - So I am forced to go to OMC which by the way is a pretty good clinic. But for 360/month with a 10% deductible, I would like to be able to choose where I go.. Thank you, And go Public Option. I Support (Even though I have to work and may not be able to attend the rallies) Of those congressmen and senator’s that are FOR public option.
Moppit
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:55:54 PM
I am local, and for public option. Unfortunately I could not make the rally, because I have a job that makes other people (Who enjoy their “cadillac” health care coverage) rich. If I were to show up, my job which grosses about 400/wk, of which 90/wk is health insurance (thank god Im covered) may be in jeopardy. I Support public health option, I think the tea party people are hopelessly uninformed (and many of them I personally believe are paid to blog on behalf of industries). And, Even though I have insurance, I find that the price of health-care and the hippocratic oath which many doctors take are in conflict. Last but not least, My biggest gripe, is That even though I pay approx 360/month through my employer for family medical insurance, The Mayo Clinic is not in network - So I am forced to go to OMC which by the way is a pretty good clinic. But for 360/month with a 10% deductible, I would like to be able to choose where I go.. Thank you, And go Public Option. I Support (Even though I have to work and may not be able to attend the rallies) Of those congressmen and senator’s that are FOR public option.
Moppit
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:55:59 PM
I am local, and for public option. Unfortunately I could not make the rally, because I have a job that makes other people (Who enjoy their “cadillac” health care coverage) rich. If I were to show up, my job which grosses about 400/wk, of which 90/wk is health insurance (thank god Im covered) may be in jeopardy. I Support public health option, I think the tea party people are hopelessly uninformed (and many of them I personally believe are paid to blog on behalf of industries). And, Even though I have insurance, I find that the price of health-care and the hippocratic oath which many doctors take are in conflict. Last but not least, My biggest gripe, is That even though I pay approx 360/month through my employer for family medical insurance, The Mayo Clinic is not in network - So I am forced to go to OMC which by the way is a pretty good clinic. But for 360/month with a 10% deductible, I would like to be able to choose where I go.. Thank you, And go Public Option. I Support (Even though I have to work and may not be able to attend the rallies) Of those congressmen and senator’s that are FOR public option.
Moppit
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 7:56:04 PM
I am local, and for public option. Unfortunately I could not make the rally, because I have a job that makes other people (Who enjoy their “cadillac” health care coverage) rich. If I were to show up, my job which grosses about 400/wk, of which 90/wk is health insurance (thank god Im covered) may be in jeopardy. I Support public health option, I think the tea party people are hopelessly uninformed (and many of them I personally believe are paid to blog on behalf of industries). And, Even though I have insurance, I find that the price of health-care and the hippocratic oath which many doctors take are in conflict. Last but not least, My biggest gripe, is That even though I pay approx 360/month through my employer for family medical insurance, The Mayo Clinic is not in network - So I am forced to go to OMC which by the way is a pretty good clinic. But for 360/month with a 10% deductible, I would like to be able to choose where I go.. Thank you, And go Public Option. I Support (Even though I have to work and may not be able to attend the rallies) Of those congressmen and senator’s that are FOR public option.
OnlyTheTr
uth
MN, MN
Posted on 11/13/2009 at 8:41:14 PM
mldenney suggests- “OnlyTheTruth,
Wow...you’re cold. Lighten up.”
You’re correct. I get carried away sometimes.
Facetious here -->Also, it has been a little chilly in the house lately. Haven’t turned on the furnace yet. Can’t afford it. What pocket change I have is used to put food on the table. I’m getting tired of eating rice and beans. Speaking of beans, I better open the windows to air out the house. Since it’s cold outside, I better put on a coat, while I read a book by candle light.
Kate
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/14/2009 at 5:35:12 AM
Would someone supporting the “public option please explain how they can accept the following:
1. Congress will not be on this plan.
2. The plan will not go into effect until 2013.
3. Why does it not scare you that the government can put you in jail if you can’t pay?
4. How can the government cover more people for less, while at the same time creating over 100 new government agencies to enforce it’s policies and monitor us?
This is not a democrat vs republican philosophical political debate. This is going to have a real, tangible, and devastating effect on our lives.
When I hear people deny the fact that socialized medicine has been a disaster in Canada and Britan I get the feeling we are living in the twilight zone. I have done the research, I have compiled hundreds of articles.
They are going to take away your freedoms, your money, and destroy the best health care system in the world. Stalin had a term for such gullible lemmings.
It makes my head hurt when I to try to comprehend how any grown adult can believe that the government can create an efficient and effective health care system.
Dealing with Medicare is a nightmare as is. Pages and pages of rules, regulations, exemptions. It’s horrible.
aghast
jefferson, mn
Posted on 11/14/2009 at 6:19:52 AM
Kate, well articulated concerns.
The debate truly is much more fundamental than Repub vs Demo.
At heart, it’s about freedom vs slavery.
mldenney
Byron, MN
Posted on 11/14/2009 at 10:38:17 AM
LetsPlayHocky,
Good point on how to cover 1/4 million or higher bills. Maybe what I’m proposing should just be for the everyday bills as you suggest.
It would be very interesting to know what these everyday costs are, on average, vs. the catastrophic kind of costs.
Insurance started out to cover the catastrophic, then got morphed into covering everything, which I think is much of the problem. Why should insurance cover a planned cost such as delivering a baby?
marcus559
01
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/14/2009 at 10:50:52 AM
Kate -
“1. Congress will not be on this plan.” Nobody who already has insurance and wants to keep it is required to move to a public option. So that puts Congress in the same boat as the majority of Americans. The public option is an OPTION for those who want or need it.
“2. The plan will not go into effect until 2013.” I don’t know the background on this, but I suspect it is reasonable to allow the industry time to adjust to many big changes.
“3. Why does it not scare you that the government can put you in jail if you can’t pay?” First of all, if you can’t afford the insurance it will be subsidized - they just don’t want anyone opting out when they are perfectly capable of paying. Otherwise the new rules requiring the insurability of people with preexisting conditions would be subverted. Why buy any insurance if you can just wait until you’re sick and THEN buy the insurance? That said, it’s highly likely the jail-time provisions will not be in the final program… there is no support in the Senate for that level of punishment.
“4. How can the government cover more people for less, while at the same time creating over 100 new government agencies to enforce it’s policies and monitor us?” The “100 new… agencies” sound bite is a republican exaggeration. Many of those items are individual offices, programs, ombudsmen, and so on. But I’ll agree that congress is perfectly capable of making a hash of things by adding too much junk around the edges. But have you ever considered the size of the health care insurance industry? How many tens of thousands of people are employed to carefully craft policies that will fool people into thinking they are adequately covered even if they are not… thousands of actuaries, lawyers, and bureaucrats employed to make sure that the afflicted don’t get coverage, or if they already have the coverage they get the absolute minimum possible compensation? The healthcare insurance industry is an IMMENSE bureaucracy with tremendous overhead that places intolerable burdens on providers and employers, yet conservatives are blind to it… they think government has a monopoly on bureaucracy and inefficiency. Why is that?
mldenney
Byron, MN
Posted on 11/14/2009 at 10:56:34 AM
OnlyTheTruth,
Beans and a candle...indoors...better be careful :-)
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/14/2009 at 10:59:11 AM
Good rally today. I counted 96 participants early on. No counter rally detected unless you count one woman who offered a one fingered peace sign (I think it was) as she drove by.
Otherwise numerous people honked in support throughout the presentation.
jared
kasson, mn
Posted on 11/14/2009 at 11:10:44 AM
“one fingered salute”
Republican interpretation?
Hey, we’re number one!!!!!
Yeah, game, set, match, now let’s go back to atilla’s for smores!
jzee
rochester, MN
Posted on 11/14/2009 at 11:42:26 AM
“Republican interpretation?”
Nope, my newly coined euphemism. Use yer imagination.
This is, after all a public forum and I’m maintianing a modicum of decorum.
jared
kasson, mn
BillChris
topher
Olmsted County, MN
Posted on 11/14/2009 at 12:03:48 PM
“a one fingered peace sign”
All the class we have come to expect from the unhinged left.
Kate
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/15/2009 at 8:22:20 AM
I’m sorry Marcus, but your answers to my questions are not sufficient or not true.
1. Congress has their own “special” health insurance. As soon as members of Congress are sworn in, they may participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP).
The government (meaning the taxpayer) pays up to 75 percent of the premium. They have publicly refused to “opt in” to the “public option”.
As an aside, you will be required to show proof of “adequate coverage”. The government is giving itself 18 months to define what that is. They DON’T even know yet.
2. The more likely explanation is that if the plan went into effect before the next presidential election, Obama would lose big time. Furthermore, by the year 2013 it will be against the law to purchase insurance from a private company. HSA’s will be outlawed.
Again, I must point out the contradiction so obvious by the “hurry up and wait” approach. Nobody has time to read these because it is a crisis so urgent we have to wait 4 years to implement the “solution”. I’m sorry, that is indefensible.
3. Huh? Your “answer” is all over the place. It’s the liberals that are claiming that insurance companies refuse to cover those with pre-existing conditions. Anyway, back to the jail threat—it is not reasonable to jail a citizen for not buying what the government mandates. Furthermore, it is unconstitutional.
4. Again, over the map with your answer, in some places agreeing with me. How can it be better to replace private sector employees with government employees paid by the tax payer? Do you know how much this is going to cost? Apparently not.
Do you know the history of these type programs? Apparently not.
They want to force us to pay for a program that they themselves refuse to participate in. They did not have time to read the bill before they voted on it, but we’re in such a hurry that we won’t implement it until 2013.
Kate
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/15/2009 at 8:34:02 AM
Marcus says: “I assume you are also against socialized policing? Socialized fire fighting? Socialized infrastructure and socialized public health protection? Socialized air-traffic control? Socialized military defense?”
The powers granted the FEDERAL government are few and specific, chiefly the powers concerned with “war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce.
The main goal of government in free society is to protect the law abiding people from foreign and domestic threats. On the state and local level, people pool their money to pay for things like police. The MILITARY is one of the main reasons to have a federal government.
One of the goals of this administration is the elimination of private property. Private property is a cornerstone of free society.
Please, look up the definitions of socialism, capitalism, Marxism, and communism. Obama is a Marxist, he admits it in his books. Marxism is an agent to transform capitalism and free enterprise into communism.
If you don’t value capitalism and free enterprise then you neither understand nor appreciate what has made America great.
Kate
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/15/2009 at 8:43:48 AM
In my last post the document that lays out these guidelines is the United States Constitution. It is 10 pages long, please read it, certainly many of our representatives have not. Several of them have been asked where they find the constitutional authority to do this, they don’t have a clue
The health care bill, HR 3962 is roughly 2000 pages long and almost completely unreadable or clear on anything.
You can read our constitution at:
http://www.lexrex.com/informed/foundingdocuments/ConstBillAmend.htm
Please let us know when you find the part that authorizes the federal government to run health care (or the public school system for that matter). And please, don’t point to the general welfare clause.
The constitution says the government should “promote” the “general welfare”, not “legislate”, “mandate”, or “use the force and threat of incarceration.”
Birddog
rochester, mn
Posted on 11/15/2009 at 9:00:48 AM
Kate:
It isn’t what the Constitution says that counts, it’s what liberals and liberal judges say it says that counts.
Browse photo reprints
