Sounds like someone we all know

[jefe]

Pick your poison.

[Skarp]

If you are truly passionate about the poor you can't possibly support the Democratic party, which has institutionalized inter-generational poverty via the programs it has enacted, and which does nothing but patronize and divide people based on class and race. Helping the poor is about job creation, and the Democrats kill jobs. They always have. Democratic leaders like nothing more than to have huge segments of the population dependent upon them for their sustenance.

Like I said, I don't support any political party. I assume by your comments that you feel the Republicans do none of these things, which I highly doubt. A politician by any other name is still a skunk.

Why would you make that assumption, particularly after I have said in this very thread that the Republican party is a far cry from conservative. The difference is that the Democrats always do those things, to the greatest extent and as quickly as possible. No trial runs. No reversal in response to bad results. They are ideologically driven, empirical outcomes be damned.

And the difference is also that the Republican party is the default home of conservatives, so it is the party in which at least a meaningful coalition tries to put the brakes on massive government expansion, and on the implementation of policies which fly in the faced of fundamental principles (e.g., of economics, human nature, etc.) and are thus doomed to failure. Liberals recognize no such limitations, and act accordingly.

Yes, politicians are skunks. And corrupt as hell. So why in God's name would you want to hand the healthcare system and all the resources associated with it over to their control? At least in the private sector there is competition...and liability. At least the individual has choices and recourses, despite the imperfections. With the government you have neither. Just unchecked corruption.

[jofus]

[coolstuff]

Why would you make that assumption, particularly after I have said in this very thread that the Republican party is a far cry from conservative. The difference is that the Democrats always do those things, to the greatest extent and as quickly as possible. No trial runs. No reversal in response to bad results. They are ideologically driven, empirical outcomes be damned.

And the difference is also that the Republican party is the default home of conservatives, so it is the party in which at least a meaningful coalition tries to put the brakes on massive government expansion, and on the implementation of policies which fly in the faced of fundamental principles (e.g., of economics, human nature, etc.) and are thus doomed to failure. Liberals recognize no such limitations, and act accordingly.

Yes, politicians are skunks. And corrupt as hell. So why in God's name would you want to hand the healthcare system and all the resources associated with it over to their control? At least in the private sector there is competition...and liability. At least the individual has choices and recourses, despite the imperfections. With the government you have neither. Just unchecked corruption.

"Always" is an over-used term, like when I tell my wife I "always" put the clothes in the basket. Same with the word "never." Like I "never" leave dirty dishes on the counter.

My beef with healthcare is with the insurance companies. There is no competition in healthcare insurance. In fact nearly the entire state of Mississippi is controlled by one health insurance provider. They can bully doctors and hospitals into accepting their low reimbursement rates while jacking up premiums way above the rate of inflation. Doctors have no choice. Either they get on board or lose patients, because the health insurance companies have employers locked up too! They keep competition out but offer different "plans" within their own company. If you want true competition in healthcare, then those guys need to be put in line. It won't happen otherwise.

[Skarp]

"Always" is an over-used term, like when I tell my wife I "always" put the clothes in the basket. Same with the word "never." Like I "never" leave dirty dishes on the counter.

My beef with healthcare is with the insurance companies. There is no competition in healthcare insurance. In fact nearly the entire state of Mississippi is controlled by one health insurance provider. They can bully doctors and hospitals into accepting their low reimbursement rates while jacking up premiums way above the rate of inflation. Doctors have no choice. Either they get on board or lose patients, because the health insurance companies have employers locked up too! They keep competition out but offer different "plans" within their own company. If you want true competition in healthcare, then those guys need to be put in line. It won't happen otherwise.

Well, if you take issue with the blanket nature of my statement, you have an open invitation to provide counterexamples.

There is no competition between insurance companies precisely because of government regulation. True, the companies attempt to influence the political environment in order to protect their profits, just like any other industry...but it is ultimately the government's fault that the insurance industry is non-competitive.

You want real lack of competition...just let the government into the insurance business. Oh, and by the way, a lynch-pin of the Republican plan for insurance reform involves doing away with the protectionist regulations that prevent open and free market competition. It is the Republicans who are addressing the issue you profess to be concerned with, not the Dems.

Finally, irrespective of the relative lack of competition in the insurance market, insurance companies do not make the obscene profits that the scare-mongers and power-hoarders accuse them of. Several recent studies place those profits at very modest levels compared to many other industries (anywhere from 3-6%). Still, opening up competition will force those companies to become more efficient and provide better service in order to remain profitable, so that is what should be done. The public option (i.e., eventual government monopolozation of the industry) is a disastrous idea.

[coachmatt]

Heres a few contradictions our prez has made since the inception of his healthcare reform:

Contradiction #1: From a Promise That “If You Like Your Current Plan You Can Keep It” to Half of Medicare Advantage Benefits Being Cut

Contradiction #2: From “If You Like Your Current Doctor You Can Keep Your Doctor” to Squeezing Doctors and Hospitals Until They Reduce Patient Access

Contradiction #3: From a Promise that No Government Bureaucrat Will Stand Between Patients and Doctors to a Medicare Commission With the Power to Deny Treatment

Contradiction #4: From a Promise to “Slow the Growth of Health Care Costs For Our Families” to a New Tax on Hearing Aids, Wheel Chairs and Breakthrough Drugs

Contradiction #5: From a Promise that Health Care Reform Will Fix the Economy to New Taxes on Small Businesses

Contradiction #6: From Insuring All Americans to Leaving 25 Million Uninsured
One of President Obama’s three basic goals for health care reform is to provide insurance to those who don’t currently have it.
That’s the promise. The reality? The CBO has determined that the Senate bill will leave about 25 million nonelderly Americans uninsured.


Wake up people

[Skarp]

One of President Obama’s three basic goals for health care reform is to provide insurance to those who don’t currently have it.
That’s the promise. The reality? The CBO has determined that the Senate bill will leave about 25 million nonelderly Americans uninsured.


Wake up people

This isn't about providing better (and better access to) health care, and never has been. Just like climate change legislation and treaties aren't about saving the planet. Nationalized health care is about creating a massive class of people dependent upon the government for the things that they need, and thereby entrenching big, all-intrusive government as a permanent feature of our country and our lives.

Once government has the power to grant or withhold access to the things you need, and the power to examine every aspect of your life to determine whether your conduct is in conformity with the standards that government dictates, well...Marxist utopia is just a few pen strokes away. That is what motivates the idealogues currently running our government and the Democratic party. And that is why they could care less that their current and proposed policies are being soundly rejected by the populace and will likely get many of them voted out of office. They don't care about sacrificing a few pieces...they are playing for checkmate.

[Skarp]

Ahhh, government.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/polit ... 09732.html

Kind of makes you nostalgic for the good old days of $400 toilet seats.

[coolstuff]

Oh, and by the way, a lynch-pin of the Republican plan for insurance reform involves doing away with the protectionist regulations that prevent open and free market competition. It is the Republicans who are addressing the issue you profess to be concerned with, not the Dems.

I don't care who does it, just get it done. Keep in mind I don't pitch my tent in anyone's camp. I've voted for both parties over the years in local, state and national elections. Bashing the Dems won't get my ire up.