"No He [Obama] Can't" by Anne Wortham

[BethFromVA 5]

I do know that I come off as harsh and opinionated. Especially in print.

Me too. A lot of people are usually surprised when they meet me. Expecially that I don't have horns and a tail. :thumbup:

As for prefacing my posts with "it's my opinion that..." it is a good idea, but I don't try to pass my posts off as anything but my opinion.

And that's a big part of the problem: I misunderstood and thought you were.

I've only cited other people's data or rare occasions because I figure we all have the same access to TV, newspapers and the internet.

Not really, considering that I don't have cable, but yes, I could scan the internet for news sources. Sometimes I find stuff. Sometimes I don't.

I've found that most of the stuff that people post links to are simply other people's opinions. Like someone from Fox or some right wing publication, or MSNBC or some liberal publication. I don't want to wade through that stuff. I've usually already been exposed to it in some form. That's how I come up with the opinions I have.

True, and understood.

Sometimes people cite those other people's (political pundits usually) opinions as fact. I find that very irritating. So that's why you probably got my reaction in the past.

Also understood.

I too will do my best to mend my ways and be more peaceable and less confrontational. But shucks, you know as well as I do that we won't have nearly as much fun.

Well, this is true... but we are smart women. We can figure out a way to make it fun anyway. Besides, I CAN have a fun, heated debate with people I absolutely disagree with where nobody has come away with hurt feelings. Lulu is a prime example: We couldn't disagree more, but I really enjoy her and (she says) she enjoys me too. To be honest, I wouldn't have her any other way than the way she is, even though we probably wouldn't agree on which side of the earth the sun rises.

I guess I'm just suggesting that we cut each other some slack and stop duking it out because it seems to upset other people. I think you and I could probably have a confrontation everyday and wind up still being civil on a different thread, but this has gone on for so long, I reckon that's not happening.

Very fair.

I will do my best, I promise. I mean, can't we all just get along?

Yes, Rodney.

[plain 12]

plain, thanks for making it public that you're insistence on back up data is only directed at people you don't agree with. You're still funny, so I guess we won't boot you off.

Silly BJean....of course I hold everybody to the same standards. That's why I was explaining the rationale to Wootsie when I wrote:

I think that's fair, if Wootsie is trying to get into the debate. She's kinda new to the show though, so maybe she doesn't know about my fetish for facts, vs. opinion (although opinions are fine, it's hard to support a debate on them, Wootsie).

Beth and Jack (conservatives) do or will provide the sources of their information when asked. SoCal and Cleo's Mom (liberals) are good about doing the same.

Overall, those who have health insurance in this country are happy with their plan and care. And under any kind of healthcare change that is being proposed, THEY CAN KEEP THAT PLAN. PERIOD.

Not so fast! That point is my biggest reservation about single payer (it even trumps the massive cost of the program, IMO). What the White House is saying is that you won't be forced by the government to participate (which in itself is not really true....we're all paying for the premiums with our tax dollars, whether we would be using the government's insurance or not). However, down the road, there will be NO MORE private insurance if the government gets into the market. So, everybody will be back-ended into the program eventually. President Obama and his cabinet know this.

But if they're not happy with their plan, they will have choices, just like the members of Congress do. Their health care is paid for by taxpayers and they get to choose.

Again, not so fast! Congressional healthcare is the creme de la creme. The general public will never have access to the kind of medical care that congress gets (for life, for free, BTW. Even if they've only served one term. But it's good that they're concerned about the rest of us:wink2:).

I watched Pres. Obama's speech on healthcare the other day. He said people without insurance or those who don't like their plan would have a choice. One of those choices would be a government plan. That plan would be provided by health insurance companies but the government would be able to negotiate costs, etc.. which is a good thing

See above. He isn't being totally honest here (he isn't exactly lying....he's just omitting some important stuff). Plus, do you really think that the government will pour (to the tune of a trillion bucks / year) money into an insurance plan and let the private sector continue to make the decisions?? Uh-uh.....this is a government edge-out, pure and simple.

Look at how many people post on the pre-op thread about being denied coverage. Or those who can't get insurance due to a pre-existing condition. That won't be allowed under the new plans

Respectfully, you are not thinking this through, CM......President Obama has already empowered a group to strat looking into "most efficient medical practices". That means that the government is already looking to write protocols on healthcare policy....that means that it will only be efficient (moneywise) for patient population a, b and c to recieve medical procedure x,y and z. In English, an 80 y/o may not be covered for a major surgery simply because they won't live long enough to justify the cost of the procedure.

Everyone should see the movie "Sicko" which compares our healthcare system to other countries (not just Canada). We come up woefully short in many areas. When a boatload of New Yorkers with 9/11 caused health problems whose insurance wouldn't provide care or who were uninsured can go to Cuba and receive first rate care, that is scary. And it is unacceptable.

When an uninsured farmer cuts off two fingers with a table saw and is given the price for attaching each, can only afford to have one attached. This is in the United States. Why should someone here have to live forever without a finger? Yes, these are anecdotal but my point is that the movie does an excellent job of showing the shortcomings of our healthcare industry compared to others.

Oh man....I had internally bet a few people how long it would be before somebody started quoting Sicko. CM, if you think Cuba has better medical care than America (or if you think that their general population receives "first rate care"), there's nothing left for me to say to you.

Having the uninsured go to the emergency room for basic medical care is driving up the cost of healthcare for the rest of us.

True. The key is prevention....it always has been about prevention. The trouble with prevention is that the majority of Americans don't routinely utilize preventitive care.

On a personal note, here where I live, a group of concerned medical people set the wheels in motion for a free "people's clinic" where free medical care / screenings were provided. The clinic was staffed by docs and nurses that donated their time. They got a federal grant to cover utility costs, and to defray costs of more complicated medical procedures (the patients were to be sent to area hospitals, with the clinic "covering" the costs of the tests). Within 3 years, the clinic was shut down. Why? Nobody was using it how it was intended to be used. All the patients wanted were pain meds or chronic treatment. So few of the patients kept their appointed tests (that were free, mind you) that it became a bit of joke. It was an utter failure. Now, I'm not saying that our little podunk free clinic should be the national model. But what it did teach me was that people need to somehow be held accountable for their health (whether that be monitarily, or having to keep a certain number of appointments, or whatever) or they don't appreciate it.

Beth, is there any way we can declare a truce between us?

If you broker a peace deal here, you should go to the middle east to see what you can do there!!

I know I can tend to do that, and I'll work on it. I don't see plain as being that way, but I'll let him speak for himself.

I apologize if I have ever gotten carried away and "piled on". Soemtimes, I totally agree, and just take the other position, just to get the debate going. This helps me solidify my ideas and opinions.

[BJean 16]

Plain sez: "However, down the road, there will be NO MORE private insurance if the government gets into the market. So, everybody will be back-ended into the program eventually. President Obama and his cabinet know this."

and goes on to say, "Respectfully, you are not thinking this through, CM......President Obama has already empowered a group to strat looking into "most efficient medical practices". That means that the government is already looking to write protocols on healthcare policy....that means that it will only be efficient (moneywise) for patient population a, b and c to recieve medical procedure x,y and z. In English, an 80 y/o may not be covered for a major surgery simply because they won't live long enough to justify the cost of the procedure"

Ok plain, pony up. Where's your proof? Where's your documentation? Why should be accept what you're saying is fact? Hmmmmm???

[BethFromVA 5]

Plain sez: "However, down the road, there will be NO MORE private insurance if the government gets into the market. So, everybody will be back-ended into the program eventually. President Obama and his cabinet know this."

and goes on to say, "Respectfully, you are not thinking this through, CM......President Obama has already empowered a group to strat looking into "most efficient medical practices". That means that the government is already looking to write protocols on healthcare policy....that means that it will only be efficient (moneywise) for patient population a, b and c to recieve medical procedure x,y and z. In English, an 80 y/o may not be covered for a major surgery simply because they won't live long enough to justify the cost of the procedure"

Ok plain, pony up. Where's your proof? Where's your documentation? Why should be accept what you're saying is fact? Hmmmmm???

It's hard to see proof of what is likely coming down the pike. Some things you can see just based on the way things are going. I hope he and I are wrong in our beliefs, but I don't think we are. I think for sure employers will no longer offer insurance because, frankly, why should they? Whether people will then be able to afford private insurance over whatever the government is offering (whether or not it costs) is yet to be seen, but yes, I believe that it will become government insurance -- which is what they want.

[BJean 16]

If that happens over the long haul, I will be shocked. The insurance companies are way, way too powerful to let it wind up that way.

Still waiting for proof, tap, tap, tap.

[BethFromVA 5]

If that happens over the long haul, I will be shocked. The insurance companies are way, way too powerful to let it wind up that way.

People said that about AIG and the auto industry too.

[BJean 16]

And the lenders. But few have the lobbiest strength in Washington that the insurance industry has. IMHO.

[BethFromVA 5]

And the lenders. But few have the lobbiest strength in Washington that the insurance industry has. IMHO.

Maybe... but AIG is insurance too, and look what happened to them. :sad:

[wootsie73 0]

I just want to say I'm leaving Lapbandtalk.com due to my posts being pulled for no legitimate reason. There are other forums like obesityhelp.com that don't do that.

Joan

[plain 12]

Obama to Tell AMA Health Plan Will Seek Efficiency (Update2) - Bloomberg.com

The first part is how Obama is trying to "buy" the support of the AMA with promises of tort reform....although he flat out rejected caps on malpractice cases. Sprinkled throughout is how the AMA does NOT support Obama's plan as it now stands.

Articles & Commentary

About midway through there is a good explanation of "Pay or Play", which explains how employers that currently offer private insurance will get hammered financially for that priviledge. Also, midway-to -end is the affirmation of the creation of the "efficient practices" council.

http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/health_proposal_summaries.pdf

Reviews details of both Obama's and McCain's plan (spoiler - both plans suck). The authors plainly favor Obama's plan, although they are critical that: it still won't cover everybody, it will cost a LOT (and figures are much higher now than they were in this document....and costs are still climbing, BTW), and those costs will ultimately be paid by businesses and "all taxpayers, not just those deciding to purchace coverage"

Conservative Principles of Health Care Reform: The Road Ahead

Says reform is critical, but concludes that single payer would "be damaging"

Obama's health plan is no bargain: 4 reasons why - Jun. 11, 2009

shows how this plan basically will eventually drive up costs. Specifically shows how single payer will kill private insurance

http://www.lewin.com/content/publications/LewinCostandCoverageImpactsofPublicPlan-Alternative%20DesignOptions.pdf

A detailed anaylsis on how single payer will force private insurance holders to a government plan. This study estimates 120 million people will be forced from private insurance to the "public option".

I can keep digging more out, but read these first. If you want more links, or specific links to something, let me know.

For giggles, here's a study that shows cancer survival in the United States (even including *gasp* poor people) kicks the ass of cancer survival rates in Europe, even among the wealthiest nations:

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/561737

So much for us having the worst healthcare among industrialized countries. If you read the whole thing, England's survival rates are particularly low. The authors chalk that up to England's "cancer plan and it's efficiency practices" (sound familiar?).

Edited June 19, 2009 by plain

[plain 12]

I just want to say I'm leaving Lapbandtalk.com due to my posts being pulled for no legitimate reason. There are other forums like obesityhelp.com that don't do that.

Joan

Joan, respectfully, are you pretty comfortable with how to navigate around these forums? Because none of your posts have been pulled. I can read them all.

Only a mod can delete posts, and nobody has done that. If you're sure you're "moving around" correctly, than maybe something is wrong with your computer? Because, again, I can see all your posts.

[BethFromVA 5]

Joan, respectfully, are you pretty comfortable with how to navigate around these forums? Because none of your posts have been pulled. I can read them all.

Only a mod can delete posts, and nobody has done that. If you're sure you're "moving around" correctly, than maybe something is wrong with your computer? Because, again, I can see all your posts.

As can I. And believe me, I have seen some really heated, personal stuff not get pulled. Certainly they would never pull your post(s) for voicing your opinion.

[BJean 16]

Oh yeah, AIG is a fine example of what I was saying.

[BJean 16]

Joan I don't know why you are unable to access your posts, but I can and your posts haven't been pulled. Do you think that perhaps you've blocked your own posts without meaning to so or something?

[BJean 16]

plain I tried to post a link to "Conservatives for Patient's Rights" webpage. I don't know why it wouldn't transfer. Anyway, if you'd like to read a side by side comparison of 3 or 4 of the proposed plans, you can easily see how the things that people like Newt Gingrich are proposing empower the insurance companies and fall short of fixing the problems.

When I have more time I will check out your links. Thanks for doing your homework, if you links actually do that.