1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

The goal of obamacare

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by Dr.Who, Aug 10, 2009.

  1. Dr.Who

    Dr.Who Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,776
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horse Country
    I really hate to jump onto conspiracy theories or accusations of what is behind ones motives. But it gets to the point that I just cannot think of any other reasonable explanation behind why this admin want the health care they are proposing. They have listed all sorts of reason and then the plan they propose solves none of those. If they are not proposing changes for the reasons they propose then what are the reasons?

    Here is an article that describes some of the real reasons:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...rnment_health_care_in_stealth_mode_97826.html

    Here are some quotes:
    So is socialism the goal?
     
    1 person likes this.
  2. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    Its not Socialism when Americans do it...

    The goal is the same goal that all Statist politicians have always had throughout the centuries - Power. Healthcare is one sixth, or seventh, of the economy, thats a huge chunk of the econ for them to get their statist paws on and a great loss for our personal liberty.

    Additionally, the paternalist leanings of the welfare statists will necessarily result in "common sense" legislation that dictates "appropriate" behavior for the masses and establishes guidelines for who gets how much care and when. We tax smokers for their own good... We tax drinkers for their own good... We tax fat people for their own good... Because stomping on personal liberty is whats best for the greater good of society.

    By making everyone financially responsible for their neighbors through the welfare state, they are making your personal choices a matter of public scrutiny and eliminating your rights to privacy.

    The Obama admin has made no secret that they think the elderly need to come to terms with thier mortality and accept it, rather than having costly procedures to prolong their lives, because that money could be spent on younger people who aren't a drain on the system.
     
  3. r0beph

    r0beph New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2007
    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville, Alabama

    Citations please? Real citations, not rightwing spin please. Fact check orgs would be nice.

    (I think you misunderstand the intent of the living will addition, and mind you, it was added by a republican)
     
  4. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    what you want facts? what Rush says does not = fact? what some internet Email said does not equal fact? you mean actuly show where it says anything about that in the bill? the one we already showed did not? :)
     
  5. r0beph

    r0beph New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2007
    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville, Alabama
    Oh I fully believe everything that rush says is fully true; at least in some alternate quantum universe where the Darwinian advance of humanity somehow filtered out sanity about 10,000 years ago.

    But yeah, I wish people would stop spouting tard-nougat and come with REAL facts, be it bill text, scientific studies (that are peer reviewed, published in PRESTIGIOUS journals and not these 5$ fee publish anything crap journals.)


    edit: Okay just for fun, here's some factcheck goodies on the what is and isn't. There are five page and each "meter" links to a complete story. If you want to make snarky remarks, read all of them first and use what you learn in your replies, lest you sound silly. Polifact is non-partisan, you'll find both coverage of what obama hasn't done (that he said he'd do) and arguments against false information from republicans. So I feel this is quite a valid citable source, not to mention they cite everything and it is all independently verifiable.
     
  6. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    I think you misunderstand the nature of my complaints. I'm no Republican, they have proven themselves to be big government welfare statists time and again and they rely on the fallacious notion that they are the lesser of two evils to win elections: "We won't destroy your liberties, or grow government, as quickly as the Democrats would, so vote for us."

    Both parties are marching us away from individual liberty and into collectivist despotism.

    In that rare AP story, Obama is called on his repeated lies about the proposed healthcare reform not interfering with healthcare decisions but leaving them to be made between you and your doctor.

    June 26, 2009

    While he didn't answer her question, he did admit that government bureaucrats will be making the healthcare decisions but rationalizes that by stating they are currently being made by private insurers and government bureaucrats already in charge of Medicaid and Medicare.

    The government board, the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research, was established in the Stimulus bill from earlier this year through an allocation of 600 million dollars, which obama called a "downpayment" on universal healthcare.


    Hey Pocketfullofshat, how about you stop spouting tard-nougat and tell us which group Obama is lying to?

    According to the House bill, Obama's own statements, and the already passed provisions inside the Stimulus bill, its clear that Obama supports a single payer system but understands he must socialize the system incrimentally, rather than all at once.

    He lied to the American people to get elected. He lied to the American people to pass the stimulus bill. He has to lie to the American people to get his healthcare reform as well because if he tells the truth, his plans will be rejected by the American people and go down in flames.

    I'm presuming you meant Politifact.com, since there is no polifact.com... Well, they are piss poor at doing their homework:

    There is video above of Obama, Shakowsky (sp) and Barney Frank all advocating for single payer systems, clearly this went unnoticed by Politifact in their claim that only a couple people in congress support a single payer system...

    That last quote from Obama supports the statements he made in the video that we have to move towards single payer incrimentally, over a period of 10-20 years, rather than offering legislation "to suddenly completely scrap what everybody is accustomed to and the vast majority of people already have" to create a single payer system.
     
  7. bododie

    bododie New Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,639
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Maybe the "swipe" at national healthcare this time is simply to assess how many Americans there can be for the program to work. End result: Too bad for those Americans who won't...work. Lol.
     
  8. Dr.Who

    Dr.Who Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,776
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horse Country
    Lets all be clear: Gen was right. The bill very very clearly encourages euthanasia of elderly. You will all no doubt have read the numerous reports that the right is spinning this to read that the bill mandates euthanasia. Yes, there are misunderstandings. Yes, the bill does not mandate talks on euthanasia (not always anyway just sometimes). But while everyone debates whether or not the bill mandates euthanasia there is no doubt at all that it encourages euthanasia in a pressure filled way and that it simultaneously discourages people choosing procedures that are expensive or less likely to work.

    "Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt. "
    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs

    "Charles Lane, an member of the editorial board of the liberal Washington Post newspaper, admits in a Saturday column that at least some of the concerns are well-founded.

    "As I read it, Section 1233 is not totally innocuous," Lane writes, adding that it "addresses compassionate goals in disconcerting proximity to fiscal ones."

    "Though not mandatory, as some on the right have claimed, the consultations envisioned in Section 1233 aren't quite 'purely voluntary,'" as backers of the bill assert, Lane adds. "To me, 'purely voluntary' means 'not unless the patient requests one.' Section 1233, however, lets doctors initiate the chat and gives them an incentive -- money -- to do so. Indeed, that's an incentive to insist.

    "Patients may refuse without penalty, but many will bow to white-coated authority. Once they're in the meeting, the bill does permit 'formulation' of a plug-pulling order right then and there," Lane explains.

    "What's more, Section 1233 dictates, at some length, the content of the consultation," Lane continues.

    Ultimately, the Post editorial writer says "Section 1233 goes beyond facilitating doctor input to preferring it. Indeed, the measure would have an interested party -- the government -- recruit doctors to sell the elderly on living wills, hospice care and their associated providers, professions and organizations."

    "You don't have to be a right-wing wacko to question that approach," he concludes.

    Bioethicist Frank Beckwith notes Lane's analysis in comments of his own that appeared on the blog of the publication First Things.

    "Supporters of H.R. 3200 claim that its end of life counseling provision, section 1233, is merely voluntary for the patient," Beckwith explains.

    "But a closer look shows that section 1233 includes conditions and financial incentives for physicians and other health care providers that create a setting in which an elderly patient’s decision to appropriate this option is likely to be less than voluntary," he writes.

    Beckwith says anyone with elderly parents should be "deeply concerned" about the section.

    "If, let’s say, H.R. 3200 or something close to it were to become law and the public option pushes private insurance into near non-existence (as would surely happen with all the incentives in place), then there will no neighboring state to which to run," he says. "You won't be able to take your business elsewhere, since there will be no elsewhere."

    "And to whom will you issue your grievance, a special 'health court,'" Beckwith asks.

    Such a court, he says, would be "one likely informed by a youth-worshipping culture and a utilitarian bioethics philosophy that sees the elderly (not to mention, handicapped infants) as burdens that are siphoning away valuable resources that could be put to better use in support of society’s “real persons” and more productive contributors."
    http://www.lifenews.com/bio2913.html

    The House health-care reform bill proposes to decrease hospital visits by establishing a “medical home pilot program” for elderly and disabled Americans.

    Such a medical home would not require a physician to be on the staff, and therefore could be run solely by nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Medical homes also would practice “evidence-based” medicine, which advocates only the use of medical treatments that are supported by effectiveness research.

    The pilot program targets Medicare beneficiaries who have a high medical “risk score” or who require regular monitoring, advising or treatment."
    http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=51759

    And we have all seen the quotes from President Obama about only doing what works and not doing procedures with a less than 5% chance of success.

    "Concerns about Obama’s health-care reform adversely affecting older Americans are not new. Earlier this year, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the “Stimulus Bill”) appropriated $1.1 billion for research into “comparative effectiveness,” which compares clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of medical treatments, procedures and strategies. One aspect of this comparison is a concept called “Quality Adjusted Life Years,” where the value assigned to life varies with the health state of the person. This method is controversial because it means that some people will not receive treatment if the calculated cost is not warranted by the benefit to their quality of life."

    May agrees and says that health-care rationing takes place in Oregon, one of two states where physician-assisted suicide is legal. People fighting life-threatening illnesses there regularly receive letters saying that the state insurance plan would not cover their medication but would pay for a lethal prescription to end their lives,[]"
    http://www.ncregister.com/daily/health_care_duty_to_die
     
  9. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nope....competition is the goal.

    If the health-insurance-companies are incapable of competing (i.e. MEGA-bonu$e$) with an entity that has significantly-lower administrative-expenses, those insurance-companies are probably in the wrong business.

    :rolleyes:

    Compete....and, let the People decide.​
     
  10. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gee.....I always wondered why my auto-insurance provider was constantly peeking-into-my-windows!!!

    :eek:
     
  11. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Damned right!!!

    Anyone can download their own Living Will....cross-their-fingers....and, make their OWN decisions!!!

    The IDEA that any proposed-plan would compen$ate someone's family-doctor....to interfere with that decision (with a bunch o' that, there, fancy Doctor-talk)....and, offer an informed/experienced-opinion....is downright UNAMERICAN!!!!

    THAT'S JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID (right? :( )???!!!!!!!!
     
  12. KingClovis

    KingClovis New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2007
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Obama's objective is to further Communize America. He wants total control over education, energy and healthcare. He's a Marxist tyrant in disguise.
     
  13. r0beph

    r0beph New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2007
    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville, Alabama


    Maybe if he actually was working towards Communism in America you'd have a better idea about what communism really is. That word isn't scary anymore and it doesn't mean what you think it means.
     
  14. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    Said the supporter of Progressive Socialism...

    [​IMG]
     
  15. r0beph

    r0beph New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2007
    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville, Alabama
    Why is there a picture of Karl Marx in reference to progressive socialism, who's found was Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar. Again...I don't think you know what the words you use mean.
     
Loading...

Share This Page