Forum Thread

Bear Creek Reservoir Topics

(Bear Creek Reservoir Specific)

9 messages

Updated 11/3/2023 6:12:58 AM

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

84,091 messages

Updated 11/8/2024 10:28:12 AM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,204 messages

Updated 9/14/2024 10:10:50 AM

Bear Creek Reservoir Fishing

(Bear Creek Reservoir Specific)

0 messages

Updated

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,172 messages

Updated 9/9/2024 5:04:44 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,262 messages

Updated 11/6/2024 6:43:09 PM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,979 messages

Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Great Advertisement
Date:	8/13/2009 3:32:52 PM

URL: http://thinkingoutloudintexas.blogspot.com/2009/08/pro-healthcare-reform-advocates-fight.html

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Stephen Hawkin
Date:	8/13/2009 6:31:00 PM

Did you hear about the conservative Mag. (can't remember which) that published an editorial blasting the proposed healthcare reform and compared it with the UK system. They pointed out that physicist Stephen Hawkin, who has suffered from a debilitating for years, would be denied treatment under National Health in the UK. Well duh...do these wingnut idiots know where Mr. Hawkin resides. Cambridge, England, UK where he teaches. He has released a statement declaring that he has been well cared for by the National Health for decades and strongly supports the system. Now I don't support a UK style single payer system but will say it is supported by most of the citizen of Her Majestie's United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and it behooves the detractors of healthcare reform to check their facts to avoid kicking themselves in the behind.

Name:	Lady -	Reply
Subject:	Stephen Hawkin
Date:	8/13/2009 6:32:29 PM

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/12/hawking_british_and_alive/

URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/12/hawking_british_and_alive/

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Stephen Hawking
Date:	8/13/2009 6:33:19 PM

It was Investor's Business Daily, July 31

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	architect
Date:	8/13/2009 7:14:29 PM

unless you are retired or defeated from Congress, go down to your local hospital ER and shake hands with all your fellow democrats waiting in line all day for care, because you WILL be sitting right there with them soon.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Stephen Hawkin
Date:	8/13/2009 8:53:30 PM

I'm glad a rich, elite university professor is well cared for. Spent a couple of weeks this summer with a friend from Ireland who told me her own horror stories about the "great" care they get in the U.K. After waiting almost two years she finally had bypass surgery except the surgeon forgot to do an artery. She is now mostly disabled and she has been denied surgery to correct the error. Too much money to open her up again just because of the error the nameless, faceless government board told her. She said the vast majority of doctors in the U.K are from third world countries where the doctor pay in the U.K is apparenlty a fortune but not enough to entice home grown doctors. She also told us how her husband had cancer and they refused to treat him with state of the art techniques because "it wasn't certain to help him". He's dead now and she lamented that had they been in the U.S. with insurance the treatment he needed would have been readily available. But Hawking, our favorite atheist, is well cared for so that's all that matters.....

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Stephen Hawking
Date:	8/13/2009 9:15:17 PM

By the way it was the Investor's Business Daily. They note in a follow up piece that they accept Mr. Hawking's word that he is well cared for by NHS. "We accept this testimony and good fortune. We will note, however, that in talking about his disability on his own Web site, Hawking makes no mention of NHS and instead says that since 1985, when he had a tracheotomy, he has had "24-hour nursing care ... made possible by several foundations."

So even Mr. Hawking in his own words admits that he needs 24-hour care not provided by NHS but by private foundations. Were your average UK citizen be so lucky. British women breast cancer mortality rate is twice that of the U.S. UK heart attack fatality rate is 20% higher than the U.S. UK citizens wait twice as long as U.S. citizens to see a specialist, have elective surgery or get cancer treatments, some wait as long as a year. The mortality rate for men with colorectal cancer is 40% higher than in the U.S. As quoted by a member of Parliment, "We have 1.4 million people employed by the National Health Service. It is the third biggest employer in the world after the red army in China and the Indian National Railways. Most of those 1.4 million people are administrators, (and) managers outnumber the doctors and nurses."

But Stephen Hawking, with his private foundation money is well cared for.........and you want this for the U.S.? Only the super rich and members of Congress will have decent health care and the rest of the sheep will be sheared by some unaccountable government employee. Archie, do a little more research before cherry picking about the brilliant Mr. Hawking.....and he is brilliant because he figured out he needed to get private foundations to pay for care that NHS would not give him.....were your average Brit to be so lucky. Instead they are paying for what care NHS gives Mr. Hawking and the rest he gets from his wealthy admirers.

Its always fun to devastate a flawed point like this one.......

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Umm..I wonder
Date:	8/13/2009 10:00:05 PM

if maybe your friend from Ireland had her trouble because she wasn't a UK citizen. Ireland is not a part of the UK except for the historic Northern Ireland province of Ulster. You should know that MM with your brain power and superior education. If your friend is not a UK citizen but becomes sick while in the UK she will receive treatment from NHS. Did she maybe go to London and have a heart problem while there and hang around for 2 years waiting for non-citizen treatment?

And all of you, please read my words. I was not writing to support or comdemn the UK plan. I stated that I opposed such. My post was to glory in yet another stupid statement by some rightwing nut!

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Martini, neither you
Date:	8/13/2009 10:32:06 PM

nor anyone who posts here has to live without medical insurance. We don't know what it is like to be 50 years old, laid off, with a family, and without funds to buy COBRA. What the Reublicans are saying is that Universal Healthcare will bring down the level of our care while helping boost the level of the current uninsureds. The result will be overburned doctors and more Nurse Practitioners. Republicans like to say they have empathy for those less fortunate as long as they don't get in their way. The HMOs in 1992 promised to do something about pre-existing. They did nothing and Clinton and Bush did nothing. Now, we have Obama and the Dems going too far in the other direction. Using tactices like loony Palin that her son will have a Government panel determine if he lives or dies is sick. That is already being determined by his HMO.

Cheers.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	GF
Date:	8/13/2009 10:51:17 PM

Rattle that tin cup for all those unemployed, uninsured folks o-BAMA is responsible for. Somehow you and your friends are incapable of acknowledging the existence of Medicaid. How many of you know someone who has been unable to get health care for any reason. o-BAMA is trying to buy votes, admit it.

Health care needs reform to weed out the crooks inside the industry and the incompetent bureaucrats that allow the crooks to flourish.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	WIX
Date:	8/14/2009 12:15:23 AM

For someone to be eligible for Medicaid, they can't have a home and 2 cars like an average 50 year old laid off. I appreciate you comments about Medicaid. Having assets makes you ineligible. Many will give up medical insurance to pay the mortgage and buy food. We just have different ways of looking at it.

Think of the family that loses their insurance due to a serious medical issue.
I have seen it happen to a freind and it is not a pretty sight. But, then that is not your problem.

Name:	lotowner -	Reply
Subject:	WIX
Date:	8/14/2009 7:05:54 AM

GF, your statement about a home and 2 cars is not totally correct. If both husband and wife are alive and one of the two needs full time NH care, the one needing the care can be eligible for Medicaid if the acreage for the home is below a certain value. If the acreage is above the minimum, the acreage above the minimum is sold. Only one of the cars will be sold for NH expense.

The one still at home continues to live in the house and drive the single automobile and will continue to do so as long as they are not also required to have full time NH care also. The person still living at home is allowed to keep a minimum sum of money for funeral expense, insurance, etc.

If the one in the NH dies and the other partner needs full time NH care, then the house is sold. The SS check minus inssurance payments and an amount for personal care then goes to the NH. Medicaid then pays the NH the amount left.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	WOW lotowner
Date:	8/14/2009 8:51:22 AM

That sounds simple enough!

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Thanks
Date:	8/14/2009 8:59:02 AM

for acknowledging that Medicaid does exist. The point you make about the 50 year old getting laid off and dropping his insurance goes to the heart of the problem. He made the choice to drop his insurance. While it is certainly a tough situation and a tough decision, why should the Americal people be forced to pay for his health care when he makes the decision, his right, to drop insurance. If he has a house and two cars and probably other assets, his choice to drop insurance is a gamble he is willing to take and if he gets sick, he made a bad bet. I chose to raise my deductible to $5K on health insurance a few years back and wouldn't you know two family members required expensive surgery a few months apart, but in different years. I learned my lesson, but I paid, not the American people.

As I said, reform in health care is needed. Many, many companies and phsicians have learned how to rob tons of money from the Feds and insurance companies in the name of health care and that needs to be stopped. The incompetence of Fed employees overseeing the system is unbelievable.

This bill, as written, does not address the existing problems, it only provides a mechanism to give care for those who choose not to have insurance. If you currently pay for health insurance, a huge portion of your premium goes to pay for law suits, and cost shifting by providers to cover for underpayment by the Feds. If we all learned about the health care system before blindly following any politician we would demand a better system, but not a vote gathering system.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	WOW lotowner
Date:	8/14/2009 9:01:21 AM

lotowner's talking about Medicaid nursing home eligibility, not health care. Two different subjects.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Really?
Date:	8/14/2009 9:18:34 AM

How do you know that? Let me tell you a story so maybe you can understand where I come from. My Dad was between jobs and had a massive heart attack and quadruple bypass surgery without insurance. He got great care even though he was uninsured and the surgery saved his life. Unfortunately my parents had to declare bankruptcy because of $300,000 in medical costs, That is why my Mom lives with us now and only has social security to live on (which would require to eat dog food if it weren't for me). So please don't lecture me that I don't understand because I am a Republican. My party affiliation has nothing to do with my beliefs and I think I fully understand the implications of being without insurance a he!! of a lot more than politicians in Washington.

What you and others don't seem to get is that the vast majority of Americans, and yes that includes us conservatives and Republicans (not always the same), understand that our current system needs some repair. But what we fear much more than the imperfect status quo is turning this over to the government. As far as I can tell from my 50 years on this earth the only thing government does well is kill people and break things with the military. Obama said it best when he pointed out FedEx and UPS were doing fine but the USPS (a government agency) is a mess.

Everyone is so worried about those without insurance, right? So why don't we focus on them instead of turning the entire system upside down? That is exactly what Republicans have proposed but you probably never heard that because the Dems in Congress and the mainstream media has an embargo on their plan, just like they did to a more effective and less expensive stimulus plan proposed by Republicans.

And by the way GF, I love the fact that you mention the failure of HMO's. A couple of inconvenient facts about HMO's. They were created by Congress and in fact the leader of that legislation was none other than DEMOCRAT Senator Ted (up the river) Kennedy. So there you go. They promise a solution that fails and you want reward even more retarded Dem Congresspeople than Ted Kennedy to come up with another solution that involves more government intervention? No thanks!

And for the life of me I can't understand how you can ignore all the horror stories of socialized medicine.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Really?
Date:	8/14/2009 9:54:38 AM

Good thoughts MM. I've posted on several occasions my suggestions for a truly competitive private healthcare INSURANCE system. I would leave healthcare itself up to the medical pros, not the bureaucrats in the insurance headquarters or HHS. So, what do you think is the reform we both agree is needed? Remember it has to be politically possible.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Really?
Date:	8/14/2009 5:17:21 PM

I don't know enough about the subject to provide a definitive answer. I wish I did but the only thing I know for sure is a single payer plan through the government is not the answer to improving quality (which is already the best in the world), reducing the cost of health care (which is where we really have a problem)or insuring those chronically without insurance that actually want it and are eligible.

On the issue of how to control the ever increasing cost of health care, I do think conceptually we need to get the recipient of care closer to paying the cost (either of insurance or the actual care). Only then will the consumer become more informed and more careful about incurring costs, questioning why doctors are recommending tests that are only being done to avoid tort liability (yes I think tort reform is necessary), etc. I just know that the third-party payer system (whether private or government) where the recipient only pays a small co-pay encourages over-consumption and the one and only way for government to reduce costs is to ration health care like they do in every country with socialized medicine (remember, the vast majority of people using the health care system are sick.....rationing is the only way to reduce costs). Maybe that approach even provides a financial incentive for people to take care of themselves (lose weight, exercise more, stop smoking, etc.). It won't work for everyone but it could improve things overall. How to accomplish this is something beyond my understanding.

With regard to quality I relaly believe ours is the best in the world, just too expensive. We should not do anything to negatively impact that quality.

As for the chronically uninsured, there is probably a legitimate role for government involvement in cooperation with the private sector. But the floated idea that there are 45 million uninsured is patently misleading. We probably really have between 8 million and 14 million that really need some options. Let's focus there and not throw out the baby with the bathwater and accept a system of health care that has never worked well anywhere. Unfortunately, Obama outsourced the writing of the bill to Pelosi, Reid et al that gave the job to the staffers and lobbyists and we get a 1,000-page abomination. Like Hillary-care, it needs to be thrown out, they need to step back from the breach, actually bring Republicans and conservatives in the room and do what makes sense.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Amazing
Date:	8/14/2009 10:14:42 PM

We are in substantial agreement, especially getting the consumer closer to the payment to the service provider. The best thing we could do is get the employer out of the insurance chain. Why in the world is it the employer that sells us health coverage but all other insurance products are up to the consumer? I do think that to really make the system work coverage has to be mandatory with all Americans having to secure their own insurance with a public alternative for those truly unable to pay. We also need either no refusal for pre-existing conditions allowed or perhaps an assigned risk system for such cases. Each state should establish an insurance clearing house where consumers could "shop" for their health insurance.

I am also in favor of limited tort reform to stop or discourage really frivolous suits. But if a doctor has been drinking and takes off thr wrong leg the patient becomes a victim and deserves all he or she can get.

The problem, neither your or my ideas are at this point in time politically possible because our two parties have become so partisan and polorized at the extremes neither will ever support such reasonable ideas. Now can you see any merit in being somewhere near the political center?

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Amazing
Date:	8/15/2009 8:40:37 AM

I really think you should look at the Republican plan because it is consistent with yours and my beliefs about what needs to happen to make our system more cost effective. And it does include reasonable tort reform that would allow for suits for errors but discourages suits for unwanted outcomes which are no fault of the doctor.

As for the partisan nature of the debate, I really believe there is a genuine groundswell of passion and sometimes anger and it is entirely justified. They are rushing to pass this monstrous bill that the vast majority of Democrats have never even read and don't know what's in it. Yes, there was a lot of passion, anger and shouting at townhall meetings but the violence only began when Obama sent out his email mobilizing the SEIU goons to beat up opponents (when the White House says "we will punch back twice as hard" that is inciting violence and violence ensued) and Pelosi started the Nazi thing. So its not just the far right that is angry and scared and the polling proves that across the board.

I think much of the anger on the far left about this debate is they really believed that the election of Obama and return of control of Congress to Democrats was because America finally came to believe what they believe about the role of government. What the polls are showing is that the 40% in the middle that took a chance on Obama/Reid/Pelosi out of anger toward Bush and dislike of McCain/Palin are realizing they were duped to believe that this troika is anything but died in the wool socialists.

I do agree that our solution is not currently politically possible, but that is because Democrats have kept Republicans out of the room entirely and make no pretense of allowing or even desiring true bipartisanship. Their definition of that is for us to abandon our principals and bend over and take it in the rear. What a mess. Its no wonder Republicans are leading in the generic poll and no wonder Americans prefer divided government. Any time we get one party in control of the White House and Congress everything goes into the toilet. But right now what is important is that we defeat this bill and send the message to the White House and Congress that we want them to slow down and that we do not agree that government control of health care is the solution.

By the way, check out what Reagan said about socialized medicine thirty years ago. It is eerie.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Splitting hairs as usual
Date:	8/16/2009 4:12:24 PM

You are right, she wasn't screwed over by NHS, it was the Health Service Executive (HSE). Almost 80% of all health care expenditure in Ireland are paid by the government so it as socialized as the UK. Regardless of the minor details of which government agency refused her surgery and left her disabled she is just another fine example of why we don't want to turn it over to the government.

But as I learned from your post below you and I agree on the basic principals of health care reform so it is moot.

Quick Links
Bear Creek Reservoir News
Bear Creek Reservoir Photos
Bear Creek Reservoir Videos