What Republicans want in health care

[Mike S]

Mike S, do you get the letters from the va? I do, even though I don't use the va for it. they did say I could go there for treatment.i still can if I had too but its a tiered system whereby they look at your income.

I usethe VA for some things, even had minor surgery in New Haven VA center. The care is not bad, but the bureacracy can drive you nuts. And don't ever expect to get things done quickly.

 

[jasoncran]

I usethe VA for some things, even had minor surgery in New Haven VA center. The care is not bad, but the bureacracy can drive you nuts. And don't ever expect to get things done quickly.

that is generally what I have heard at times.

 

[TOG]

That is actually not true. Large parts of my fathers family lives in Canada and his aunt was denied a hip replacement. They said she was too old and it would be a waste. They said they'd just give her medication to "manage the pain", which translated means, "we are going to keep you doped up and senseless."

That was 25 years ago and luckily her son was able to cross the border with her to the U.S. and get the operation done. My father went to her 100th birthday this last weekend.

Context isn't only important when quoting the Bible, but also when quoting other posters. Read all of what I said:

Have you ever lived in a country with a government run health care system? I have. They don't deny people health care, as some seem to think for some reason. They provide it. If you're sick or injured, you just go to the nearest hospital and they won't ask you "Do you have insurance?", and there's no risk of them refusing you treatment because your insurance company won't pre-aprove it. They just treat you and you only have to pay a minimal amount (tens of dollars) or, in many cases, nothing at all.

Sure, people are denied treatment for a number of reasons, some of which seem fair and logical and some of which don't. I was referring to the fact that some people think that a socialized health care system means that doctors or hospitals will randomly deny people health care. That is not the case. Under the current system, it is insurance companies that make the decisions, and they decide what to do based on what will make them the most money, which very often is to deny treatment. People at some insurance companies actually receive bonuses based on how often they say no.

The TOG​

 

[TOG]

ok you do realize that would make our government a democracy not a republic? that issue was the reason that the constution almost didn't make it. it was along with the idea of the house of representatives. if its by popular vote then I might as well not bother with voting. Miami, tampa, Jacksonville, Orlando, and others all carried my state to the left for Obama. so if I lived in Utah, forget the idea as well or any small state.

Do you realize that the United States is both a democracy and a republic? A republic is a form of government where power is in the hands of representatives of the people, who are chosen, either directly or indirectly, by them. A democracy is a form of government where people have a say in the way the nation is governed, usually by voting. The US is a republic because representatives chosen by the people make the laws. It is a democracy because people can vote directly on laws, such as the various propositions that people get to vote on. If the voting system would be modified in the way Knotical suggests, the United States would remain both a republic and a democracy.

Another thing to think about... If I am wrong, and the United States isn't a democracy, and making it one would be a bad thing, why all the talk of spreading democracy all over the rest of the world?

The TOG​

 

[Deborah13]

Mike S, do you get the letters from the va? I do, even though I don't use the va for it. they did say I could go there for treatment.i still can if I had too but its a tiered system whereby they look at your income.

I did't know the VA healthcare charged a person based on their income. That's interesting, so they already have income based health insurance......affordable healthcare for the military and for veterans of the military? I'm glad to hear that.

 

[Lewis]

Claudya wrote

Please excuse me, I know I have no business posting here since I'm not American. But I wonder about something:
You rightfully ask for people's choices in a democratic and free country like the USA. But doesn't the election of President Obama, who announced a public health care system when he first campaigned for presidency, and especially his re-election for the second term; mean that the majority of American people have chosen they want a state run health care program instead of having the free market take care of it?

Yeah that is why I am saying it is here to stay' so work together to get the country back on track, And This Too' Will Pass' as the old Gospel song says. This crap will calm down just like everything else. It will become normal after a while and people will be use to it. The American people voted for it in the second election' so it is here to stay. So lets just deal with it. And shutting down the country and making us the laughing stock of the world is not the answer.

 

[PrivateTimm]

Context isn't only important when quoting the Bible, but also when quoting other posters. Read all of what I said:

Have you ever lived in a country with a government run health care system? I have. They don't deny people health care, as some seem to think for some reason. They provide it. If you're sick or injured, you just go to the nearest hospital and they won't ask you "Do you have insurance?", and there's no risk of them refusing you treatment because your insurance company won't pre-aprove it. They just treat you and you only have to pay a minimal amount (tens of dollars) or, in many cases, nothing at all.

Sure, people are denied treatment for a number of reasons, some of which seem fair and logical and some of which don't. I was referring to the fact that some people think that a socialized health care system means that doctors or hospitals will randomly deny people health care. That is not the case. Under the current system, it is insurance companies that make the decisions, and they decide what to do based on what will make them the most money, which very often is to deny treatment. People at some insurance companies actually receive bonuses based on how often they say no.

Sorry, but I am sticking with my reply. My great aunt was denied health care treatment because of her age because someone looked at an actuarial table and decided she was too old to bother with. You might consider drugging someone up "health care", I don't. It was not the proper treatment for her badly degenerated hip.

There is also no risk of being denied heath care if you go to an American hospital when you are sick or injured. You never need to be insured when going to a hospital when you are sick and injured.

 

[TOG]

Sorry, but I am sticking with my reply. My great aunt was denied health care treatment because of her age because someone looked at an actuarial table and decided she was too old to bother with. You might consider drugging someone up "health care", I don't. It was not the proper treatment for her badly degenerated hip.

There is also no risk of being denied heath care if you go to an American hospital when you are sick or injured. You never need to be insured when going to a hospital when you are sick and injured.

Very few, if any, health care systems in the world are either completely socialized or completely capitalistic. Most are a combination of the two, where the state pays for some people or some part of the system, and some people have to pay for another part. The part you're talking about, where people are denied care based on whether it is financially sound to treat them (and I don't deny that happens in some countries), is the part that isn't socialized. It's based on money, which is Capitalism.

The TOG​

 

[jasoncran]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...e-whos-so-freakin-excited-but-theres-a-catch/

and TOG
http://www.historycentral.com/elections/Electoralcollgewhy.html

we have never been a democracy and its not good that we become one. the idea you have is known in California the way you push propositions makes it moot to have any potus, the congress. that is why California is the way it is. that link also quotes the founders and the founders didn't think much on the public being able to check the laws as a person who has that as his job. they have a point. we don't have the time to do that.

 

[jasoncran]

Yeah that is why I am saying it is here to stay' so work together to get the country back on track, And This Too' Will Pass' as the old Gospel song says. This crap will calm down just like everything else. It will become normal after a while and people will be use to it. The American people voted for it in the second election' so it is here to stay. So lets just deal with it. And shutting down the country and making us the laughing stock of the world is not the answer.

well lewis. I may have my job for another three years , but I don't know. I do know that obamacare will kill any easily found part time job that used to be easily found here.as most will be part timers.

 

[TOG]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...e-whos-so-freakin-excited-but-theres-a-catch/

and TOG
http://www.historycentral.com/elections/Electoralcollgewhy.html

we have never been a democracy and its not good that we become one. the idea you have is known in California the way you push propositions makes it moot to have any potus, the congress. that is why California is the way it is. that link also quotes the founders and the founders didn't think much on the public being able to check the laws as a person who has that as his job. they have a point. we don't have the time to do that.

I'm not pushing anything. I'm just describing things the way they are. People voting directly on laws isn't only known in California. Some states may call them something different, but there are propositions to vote for in many states during every election. The fact that people can vote on laws to some extent, even though they don't vote on every law, makes it a democracy. You may not like it because it sounds so much like "Democrat", but that's the way it is. I would appreciate it if you answered the question I posed earlier.

If I am wrong, and the United States isn't a democracy, and making it one would be a bad thing, why all the talk of spreading democracy all over the rest of the world?

And it's not only Democrats who want to spread democracy. I seem to remember his holiness George W. Bush wanting to spread democracy to the Arab world.

The TOG​

 

[Knotical]

ok you do realize that would make our government a democracy not a republic? that issue was the reason that the constution almost didn't make it. it was along with the idea of the house of representatives. if its by popular vote then I might as well not bother with voting. Miami, tampa, Jacksonville, Orlando, and others all carried my state to the left for Obama. so if I lived in Utah, forget the idea as well or any small state.

Of course it would make it a true democracy. By removing the electoral college we would eliminate the possibility that it would arbitrarily decide who would be president regardless of how the people have voted.

Our country is big enough where a popular vote, by state, would work better than the electoral college system.

 

[jasoncran]

yes bush did but just because one is a potus DOESNT mean you actually understand the government you control. imagine that. I work for a city whose city council doesn't know what we do nor care to fully. imagine that.

florida has admendments but these are drawn up by the state congress and approved in a vote. your state has it done by petitioning the state. that is a bit different.i read an article on that.

that said, I will answer you don't get the idea. if the elective college is removed then why vote in the small states? its pointless the larger states would be the only ones represented.

to make a point. the largest populated states are :

California
texas
new York,
florida
Illinois, Indiana
these are but a few
the least are:
nebreska,utah, Alaska, Wyoming so if you live in those your vote wont count. read that link it goes into that

now then definition of federal republic. but first we have the FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY! A STATE that has socialized medicine and its not a democracy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_republic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

while we operate in democratic principles as the above says by definition we don't have a democratic government. that is what I meant

and we work in this

Several variants of democracy exist, but there are two basic forms, both of which concern how the whole body of all eligible citizens executes its will. One form of democracy is direct democracy, in which all eligible citizens have direct and active participation in the decision making of the government. In most modern democracies, the whole body of all eligible citizens remain the sovereign power but political power is exercised indirectly through elected representatives; this is called representative democracy. The concept of representative democracy arose largely from ideas and institutions that developed during the European Middle Ages, the Reformation, the Age of Enlightenment, and the American and French Revolutions.[5]

that is also called federal republic. the founders wanted this. lets not undo this.

to verify my point on the state population,

State or District

Population

Non-Hispanic White

Hispanic/Latino

Black

American Indian or Alaskan Native

Asian

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander

Mixed Race


Alabama 4,800,736
Alaska 740,231
Arizona 6,694,017
Arkansas 2,937,979
California 38,053,956
Colorado 5,229,196
Connecticut 3,580,709
Delaware 947,934
District of Columbia 632,323
Florida 19,057,542
Georgia 9,792,653
Hawaii 1,400,301
Idaho 1,607,582 84.0
Illinois 12,869,257
Indiana 6,589,802
Iowa 3,246,355
Kansas 2,963,118
Kentucky 4,369,356
Louisiana 4,673,372
Maine 1,401,361
Maryland 5,873,552
Massachusetts 6,601,629
Michigan 9,876,187
Minnesota 5,403,925
Mississippi 3,009,297
Missouri 5,988,927
Montana 998,199
Nebraska 1,842,641
Nevada 2,723,322
New Hampshire 1,318,194
New Jersey 8,821,155
New Mexico 2,082,224
New York 19,465,197
North Carolina 9,656,401
North Dakota 682,591
Ohio 11,736,504
Oklahoma 3,821,351
Oregon 3,851,074
Pennsylvania 12,902,379
Rhode Island 1,060,567
South Carolina 4,825,364
South Dakota 900,020
Tennessee 6,446,105
Texas 25,901,361
Utah 2,863,885
Vermont 685,741
Virginia 8,101,024 64.8
Washington 6,830,038
West Virginia 1,882,994
Wisconsin 5,726,986
Wyoming 600,626

now then given what I have said wouldn't be wise to reform the problem but well a certain president Lincoln didn't win with popular vote but by the electoral college. imagine that

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln
notice the south before the war didn't for the most part vote for him. it was the populous northern states that carried him. thus my point.

 

[jasoncran]

Of course it would make it a true democracy. By removing the electoral college we would eliminate the possibility that it would arbitrarily decide who would be president regardless of how the people have voted.

Our country is big enough where a popular vote, by state, would work better than the electoral college system.

then why didn't the founding fathers want a true democracy. see my post on state sizes. shoot 38 million in California. we know that new York, California always VOTE BLUE. IF YOU ARE in the small states which go red. stay home don't bother. your 800,000 votes(not all elidgable) to vote wont count. thus why bother. that is one reason and the others are in that link which goes into reforming it. the problem with government is this. you have those that work and run it, and those that are elected to oversee it but must ask those who run it and make policy for it. it was once said wisely. and its been forgotten. its promises for elections then once elected is governing time. meaning run NOT campaign. the potus seems to really fail at that but he isn't alone.

 

[jasoncran]

for the record my state went blue because of the larger population cities which in general across the state are blue.none of the small counties went red. THESE counties carried my state for Obama twice. dade. broward,palm beach, orange, Pinellas, Hillsborough,duval. Escambia. florida has 65 counties and only 9 carry the state. so I might as well NOT vote, why because the voices of 56 counties wont change crap!add st.lucie that went left too and they have over a million too so that makes it 10 counties and 55 that don't matter. it happened in 08 and 12.

 

[Mike S]

Of course it would make it a true democracy. By removing the electoral college we would eliminate the possibility that it would arbitrarily decide who would be president regardless of how the people have voted.

Our country is big enough where a popular vote, by state, would work better than the electoral college system.

I think that would be going in the wrong direction. Our United States is a union of states, not a single nation of 330 million people. The Prtesident should be elected by state legislatures should, not a natin wide popular vote, and the 17th Amendment should be repealed. States should have the power to deal with issues like healthcare, and the federal government should not be involved at all...nor involved in education, nor energy policy, nor most of the rest of the things were it tries to micro-manage my life.

 

[jasoncran]

I disagree with energy? why because Atlanta is powered by floridas st.lucie one and two nuke reactor plants. these grids are linked from mexico to Canada. the fact is that if say one and two fail from a melt down. florida will be hurt yes but Atlanta will go through a brown out. grids sell power to each other. remember that brown out in ny that hit Canada. a state cant make trade agreements and trading oil and power is of those things sorry.

besides ya got to deal wit the waste from said plants. im sure florida cant bury nuke waste or store it without massive issues. we have a lot of water that would be at risk that would affect other states. ie from us to south Carolina all share water!im for the derugalation of energy but not on that level.

 

[AirDancer]

If the president was elected by popular vote, then states like Montana, Wyoming, etc, with low populations would not have a voice in the process. Large population states such as California, New York, etc, would decide the presidency.

I know what you're saying, tho, jasoncran . In Chicago, people still rise from the depths of Lake Michigan to vote early & vote often. And those 'voters' always vote for Dems.

 

[jasoncran]

If the president was elected by popular vote, then states like Montana, Wyoming, etc, with low populations would not have a voice in the process. Large population states such as California, New York, etc, would decide the presidency.

I know what you're saying, tho, jasoncran . In Chicago, people still rise from the depths of Lake Michigan to vote early & vote often. And those 'voters' always vote for Dems.

ugh, I live near st.lucie county and there was erroneous votes cast. florida has almost the same population as ny. interesting

 

[AirDancer]

Your state, jasoncran , would be one of the decision-makers, should the Electoral College be disassembled. What am I typing??? Your state is already one of the decision-makers in national elections!