Health Insurance - Speedzilla Motorcycle Message Forums
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-15-2012, 02:36 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
Health Insurance

Well, well, well, look at this:
http://www.politifact.com/rhode-isla...ress-mandated/

"Harvard Law professor Einer Elhauge said that early Congresses, particularly the first Congress, had no qualms about forcing purchases.

Our research confirmed that. Congress required merchant ship owners to purchase medicines or provide health care for their workers. Seamen were later taxed to pay for what might be regarded today as an 18th-century health maintenance organization to provide for hospital care. And most able-bodied men were required to purchase weaponry for their service in the militia."

It getting so I can't believe ANYTHING the right tells me anymore. The more I look the more I learn - what a pack of lies from the right, one after the other.
Gnhtsg is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-15-2012, 04:17 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turd Ferguson View Post
Well, well, well, look at this:
PolitiFact Rhode Island | Harvard Law professor says early Congress mandated health insurance for seamen and gun ownership for most men

"Harvard Law professor Einer Elhauge said that early Congresses, particularly the first Congress, had no qualms about forcing purchases.

Our research confirmed that. Congress required merchant ship owners to purchase medicines or provide health care for their workers. Seamen were later taxed to pay for what might be regarded today as an 18th-century health maintenance organization to provide for hospital care. And most able-bodied men were required to purchase weaponry for their service in the militia."

It getting so I can't believe ANYTHING the right tells me anymore. The more I look the more I learn - what a pack of lies from the right, one after the other.
I agree and I am a republican of sorts. More conservative than republican per se. Forcing every person to purchase health insurance and taxing 100 % of people receiving health care in one form or another will decrease universal health care costs. Republicans only see the negative of providing universal health care that only the 50% of current federal income tax payers would pay for. A flat health care tax would be a good solution, no deductions allowed. Or a flat fee per person in the household.

As they say republicans don't like a flat tax because it brings in too much revenue and deems because it's regressive and we won't have a flat tax until deems realize how much revenue it will raise and republicans realize it's regressive.

Good post turdly.
twin-nut is offline  
post #3 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-16-2012, 04:21 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
Flat tax revenue, any tax system's revenue, depends on rate, deductions, credits, etc.

No one can say that a flat tax increases revenue without listing the details. The devil is always in the details.
Gnhtsg is offline  
 
post #4 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-16-2012, 02:09 PM
Meatball's Dad
 
nycstripes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: NY
Posts: 2,752
Its an intersting find but it doesn't address the huge problem of insuring people who are not going to pay into the system that pays for them.

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________________________
”Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured…but not everyone must prove they are a citizen.”- Ben Stein



ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
nycstripes is offline  
post #5 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-16-2012, 10:42 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycstripes View Post
Its an intersting find but it doesn't address the huge problem of insuring people who are not going to pay into the system that pays for them.
True. That's a big concern.

I just did a big post here or at another forum. The two main reasons health care costs have risen is 1, modern technology, and 2, Medicare.

How Medicare?

F it. I'll find the post.
Gnhtsg is offline  
post #6 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-16-2012, 10:54 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
Can't find it.
Anyway, Medicare was enacted around 1964. Before then, almost all people in the South had no health insurance. When people then got coverage they all went to the doctor and health costs skyrocketed. Meanwhile, in New England, most people already had health insurance. So there was little rise in health costs after Medicare was enacted.

That means Medicare is a big factor in our recent rise in health costs. It provided a steady stream of payments to health care institutions and they grew all over the South. I fear universal care would cost even more since there would be even more patients. It's a scary posibility. But that could be mitigated with a good system since prevention saves a ton of money in the long run. It probably all depends on what is covered under universal care. I don't think excessive testing and tech could ever be possible but who knows?

The other great force in rising health costs is technology.

Tort reform and government regulation are red herrings. There's only about 1 to 2 % savings in tort reform. Regulation is a virtual non-factor.
Gnhtsg is offline  
post #7 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-17-2012, 02:44 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turd Ferguson View Post
Can't find it.
Anyway, Medicare was enacted around 1964. Before then, almost all people in the South had no health insurance. When people then got coverage they all went to the doctor and health costs skyrocketed. Meanwhile, in New England, most people already had health insurance. So there was little rise in health costs after Medicare was enacted.

That means Medicare is a big factor in our recent rise in health costs. It provided a steady stream of payments to health care institutions and they grew all over the South. I fear universal care would cost even more since there would be even more patients. It's a scary posibility. But that could be mitigated with a good system since prevention saves a ton of money in the long run. It probably all depends on what is covered under universal care. I don't think excessive testing and tech could ever be possible but who knows?

The other great force in rising health costs is technology.

Tort reform and government regulation are red herrings. There's only about 1 to 2 % savings in tort reform. Regulation is a virtual non-factor.
Medicare is government regulation in reality as reimbursements are in large part based on Medicare approval and reimbursement rates. When Medicare approves new high tech treatment so do insurance companies. And the issue with tort reform has nothing in real terms to do with personal malpractice cost so much as defensive medicine which has a massive most to society.
twin-nut is offline  
post #8 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-22-2012, 07:32 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
Gnhtsg is offline  
post #9 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-22-2012, 08:30 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turd Ferguson View Post
Penny wise maybe. Maybe you should look into the difference in cost between the most expensive and least expensive birth control pills and what the regs specify will be covered. The overall cost to society only lessens if the people who need it use it. We will see, I am hopeful this could be a positive. Adding birth control to Big Macs might be equally beneficial. By the by, was Obama the one with this idea or should you be commending Nancy Pelosi.
twin-nut is offline  
post #10 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-22-2012, 11:04 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turd Ferguson View Post
Flat tax revenue, any tax system's revenue, depends on rate, deductions, credits, etc.

No one can say that a flat tax increases revenue without listing the details. The devil is always in the details.
What the IRS knows is how much taxable income people have prior to all credits and deductions therefore if credits and deductions are removed a flat tax rate that will meet a target revenue can be estimated within a reasonable error. The revenue will eb and tide with gains and losses in taxable non wage income obviously but that happens with the current system. Credits for children could easily be accounted for with known data as with any credit. You can choose the amount of revenue you need balancing the fact that every voter will be affected by overspending and overtaxing.
twin-nut is offline  
post #11 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-25-2012, 04:29 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
Here's a good video about overpopulation,birth control and religion.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/globa...nes_01-23.html

I really hate to rag on religion...again...but isn't it about time the Vatican admitted that we don't need more people? This "go forth and multiply" thing is so old world. The stress it magnifies is killing upward mobility, quality of life and stimulating environmental degradation, revolution and terrorism. IMO, overpopulation is becoming one of our greatest national security issues, not just "their" problem.
Gnhtsg is offline  
post #12 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-25-2012, 04:44 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by twin-nut View Post
Penny wise maybe. Maybe you should look into the difference in cost between the most expensive and least expensive birth control pills and what the regs specify will be covered. The overall cost to society only lessens if the people who need it use it. We will see, I am hopeful this could be a positive. Adding birth control to Big Macs might be equally beneficial. By the by, was Obama the one with this idea or should you be commending Nancy Pelosi.
Maybe I'll look into that - would be good to know. Here's how little they CAN cost (from the video I posted above):
"The reason the Bosteros were able to have a smaller family is because they could choose to. A community-based family planning program has made birth control options like the pill accessible and affordable at about 70 cents a month for the first time in their village."
Gnhtsg is offline  
post #13 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-25-2012, 04:44 PM
Gog
Naturally Exasperated
 
Gog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 4,019
We need fewer people, and hopefully smarter people.

If you offered unscientific, medieval medical assistance to today's religious goof they'd most likely say no, oh god, oh god... and run away. But they want to 'resuscitate' the confederacy with bloodletting fairy tales and idiotic, barbaric gibberish of the dark ages.

Yay.

"Religion ends and philosophy begins, just as alchemy ends and chemistry begins and astrology ends, and astronomy begins."
— Christopher Hitchens
Gog is offline  
post #14 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-25-2012, 05:55 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
^
You overstate it in your usual entertaining way but yes, they do not like progress. It's a dirty word. Scares the hell out of them. And in their own unique way, ironically, they are indeed full of hell.

RIP, CH ( I have his book, God Is Not Great, but haven't read it yet. I doubt there's much in it I'll disagree with though. Had to hide it while my Lutherin mother in law was visiiting over the hollidays. In fact, had to hide a few things. I'm a sinner who does no harm and I'm proud of it. As I routinely say at the music forum (the freedom-loving one) god sucks, Jesus blows, Muhammad squeels. Have a nice day. Sunny out, maybe go for a ride.)

Last edited by Gnhtsg; 01-25-2012 at 06:07 PM.
Gnhtsg is offline  
post #15 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-30-2012, 08:17 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
MORE good news from Obama:
U.S. to tell drugmakers to disclose payments to doctors - San Jose Mercury News

This cozy relationship between doctors and pharma has comprimised treatment for decades and increased our costs. It's about friggin' time!
Gnhtsg is offline  
post #16 of 18 (permalink) Old 01-30-2012, 10:21 PM
Gog
Naturally Exasperated
 
Gog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 4,019
This comment has been found in violation of H.R. 3261, S.O.P.A and has been removed. ███ ████████ ██████ ██████████ ██ ████ ██ ████ ██████████ ██ .███ ███
Gog is offline  
post #17 of 18 (permalink) Old 07-03-2012, 04:56 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
Conservatives Sowed Idea of Health Care Mandate, Only to Spurn It Later

I guess everyone knows this by now but I'll post it anyway.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/15/he...ives.html?_r=1

Everything they do is Obama driven (you gotta wonder why). It's no mystery why Congress's approval is so low?
Gnhtsg is offline  
post #18 of 18 (permalink) Old 09-07-2012, 03:37 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,833
Yeah, right. Greatest health care in the world. I've heard a few at Speedzilla say that. I guess they just don't know what they're talking about.

Report: U.S. health care system wastes $750 billion a year

"How much is $750 billion? The one-year estimate of health care waste is equal to more than ten years of Medicare cuts in Obama’s health care law. It’s more than the Pentagon budget. It’s more than enough to care for the uninsured.
Getting health care costs better controlled is one of the keys to reducing the deficit, the biggest domestic challenge facing the next president."
Gnhtsg is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Speedzilla Motorcycle Message Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome