White House Blaming the Shutdown on....

[Outcast]

Yeah. I posted that on my wall on FB, and none of my "liberal" friends have even tried to take a bite at it.

 

[Nova_C]

Wait, just so I understand this, Republicans could have gotten the mandate delay if they hadn't tried to force the administration into capitulation?

So the whole shutdown was for nothing.

Daaaaaaaaang.

 

[tsst]

Wait, just so I understand this, Republicans could have gotten the mandate delay if they hadn't tried to force the administration into capitulation?

So the whole shutdown was for nothing.

Daaaaaaaaang.

No. One of the proposals asked for just that and the response was ... Obama "I will not negotiate" and from Harry "we will not even vote on it". But now the dems, that are worried about re-election in 2014, want it delayed so the cause and effect of obamacare fines, high prices, etc do not hit the electorate before the election.

 

[Nova_C]

No. One of the proposals asked for just that and the response was ... Obama "I will not negotiate" and from Harry "we will not even vote on it". But now the dems, that are worried about re-election in 2014, want it delayed so the cause and effect of obamacare fines, high prices, etc do not hit the electorate before the election.

So, again, Republicans could have gotten the mandate delayed. At least some Democrats appear willing to do exactly that, but instead of trying to make the deal in good faith, they forced the administration into a constitutional issue. It became about separation of powers, IE, a minority of the House should not be able to force all branches of government to capitulate to their demands lest this minority shut down government services.

Anyway, it just seems really interesting to me that the Republicans could have gotten the mandate delayed, but didn't, took a massive hit in the polls and now look foolish.

 

[tsst]

So, again, Republicans could have gotten the mandate delayed. At least some Democrats appear willing to do exactly that, but instead of trying to make the deal in good faith, they forced the administration into a constitutional issue. It became about separation of powers, IE, a minority of the House should not be able to force all branches of government to capitulate to their demands lest this minority shut down government services.

Anyway, it just seems really interesting to me that the Republicans could have gotten the mandate delayed, but didn't, took a massive hit in the polls and now look foolish.

No they couldn't get the mandate delayed. One of the offers sent to the senate was to delay the individual mandate. It was firmly greeted with Obama saying I will not negotiate and Harry saying we will not even vote on it. The senate could have agreed with a delay when offered by the house but it would have appeared as though they were negotiating which Obama had already committed to not doing. Since Obama had already declared he would not Harry towed the line. So the WH forced the budget controlling branch of the gov to capitulate to their demands lest they shut down gov services, which they did until the house caved on a short term deal. The separation of powers exist for a reason but our gov has become so distorted from its intent that it rarely works, i.e. the SCOTUS legislating from the bench, unconstitutional, to approve obamacare in the first place.

I do agree the reps came out looking the worst in the deal thanks mainly to the MSM having Obama's back like usual.

IMHO obamacare is nothing more than a trojan horse for single payer.

 

[Rich Z]

So, again, Republicans could have gotten the mandate delayed. At least some Democrats appear willing to do exactly that, but instead of trying to make the deal in good faith, they forced the administration into a constitutional issue. It became about separation of powers, IE, a minority of the House should not be able to force all branches of government to capitulate to their demands lest this minority shut down government services.

Anyway, it just seems really interesting to me that the Republicans could have gotten the mandate delayed, but didn't, took a massive hit in the polls and now look foolish.

Seriously, you are BELIEVING what the Democrats are saying? That's just as bad as believing the Republicans.

 

[Nova_C]

IMHO obamacare is nothing more than a trojan horse for single payer.

As someone who lives in a system with single payer, it's pretty rad.

 

[Outcast]

As someone who lives in a system with single payer, it's pretty rad.

I have seen many Canadians comment on how horrible your health care is up there. And have seen some "copies of appointment letters" stating that the child that needed care could not be seen for 9 months...

But, these are all from people who hate your form of health care.

 

[Nova_C]

I have seen many Canadians comment on how horrible your health care is up there. And have seen some "copies of appointment letters" stating that the child that needed care could not be seen for 9 months...

But, these are all from people who hate your form of health care.

Well, sure. Unanimity is impossible in a country of 34 million. Are you telling me there aren't people in the US with only bad things to say about your health care? Does that mean your opinion on it is less valid because there are people that disagree with you?

I get that you love the idea that people are only allowed what they can pay for themselves. It makes sense that someone shouldn't have something they didn't earn. I think that stops working as soon as you start thinking about more than the individual, though.

At any rate, over 86% of Canadians think that the problems facing our health care should be solved with public, not private, solutions:
http://nupge.ca/node/2486

That's a pretty definitive rejection of privatized health care. The divide in the US between support and rejection of the ACA is much more in question:
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/obamacare-approval-poll-98728.html

That suggests to me that there's a lot more satisfaction with health care outcomes in Canada over the US.

The results are also in sync with a recent health Canada report entitled Healthy Canadians – A Federal Report on Comparable Health Indicators 2008. It found that 85.2% of Canadians were “very satisfied” or “somewhat satisfied” with health care services overall. That level was unchanged from 2005, the last time the survey was conducted.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/159005/majority-satisfied-own-healthcare-costs.aspx

Fifty-nine percent of Americans are satisfied with the total cost they pay for healthcare, precisely in the middle of the 54% to 64% range in satisfaction Gallup has found since 2001.

(I'm actually surprised that there's better than even satisfaction for health care costs in the US. Your costs are significantly higher than Canada's, even when only considering government spending per capita, let alone that Canadians don't need to purchase any health insurance for basic care.)

So while I have to admit that health care outcomes in the US aren't as bad as I thought, you have to admit that 85% satisfaction in Canada is significant.

 

[Outcast]

Does Canada fine its people if they do not have coverage?

 

[Nova_C]

Does Canada fine its people if they do not have coverage?

Yes.

That's called Tax Evasion.

 

[Nova_C]

I should clarify. Everyone has coverage by law. The cost of that coverage is single player, that is, the government negotiates and pays for all the equipment and supplies required to provide the coverage established in that law. The funds the government needs for the equipment and supplies is provided by tax revenue.

So people have coverage no matter what. If they refuse to pay for that coverage, though, they are refusing to pay taxes. Which results in fines and/or jail time.

 

[Outcast]

Well here in the U.S. we used to have freedom. Freedom to choose if we even wanted health insurance. Now we do not. And, in order to make the law "constitutional" they had to change the terminology from "Fine" to "Tax", but they did not send it back through the correct channels in order to have that tax legalized by all of the branches. Instead, relying on the bought and paid for Supreme Court to back them up, which they did on multiple occasions.

Honestly, if they really wanted to reform our health care here, they would have 1) made denying someone for pre-existing conditions illegal, 2) made every state accept every form of health insurance, which currently does not happen at all, 3) have a set low cost for premiums across the board, which does not exist as most people's premiums are dramatically rising.

Those three things would have gone a long way to fix our health care in this country. Making it easier for people to get it, and would have had a much better reaction than the "You shut up and do what we say or pay us at the end of the year so we don't arrest you."

It is classic thug tactics. Pay for protection, crap. It is not the duty of society to take care of others by force. If society wants to be charitable, then let them be so, on an individual level.... I believe that if people were allowed to be charitable, they would surprise those who believe it is their duty to enslave them into doing something by force.

But, that is only my opinion on the matter. Individual freedom is very important to me.

 

[Outcast]

I should clarify. Everyone has coverage by law. The cost of that coverage is single player, that is, the government negotiates and pays for all the equipment and supplies required to provide the coverage established in that law. The funds the government needs for the equipment and supplies is provided by tax revenue.

So people have coverage no matter what. If they refuse to pay for that coverage, though, they are refusing to pay taxes. Which results in fines and/or jail time.

And see, that is how it is different here. We are not automatically covered by the government, even under the ACA. They do not purchase the equipment and supplies via tax revenue.

We are forced to buy health care, that is still privately owned. And if we cannot prove that we have health care, we will have to pay the government via a "tax".

It does not directly affect me, because my "health care" is already covered by the government, via being enrolled in the VA health care system. Which honestly, is the worst health care that I have ever received in my life, and the reason that my wife and I have decided to get private health care, because I need second opinions on things. Without a referral from the VA I would not be able to see an outside Dr. and have it paid for, so I have gone years without proper treatment for my back, due to not having insurance.

I am against the system we have, becoming like that of the VA, where you try to set up an appointment, and they tell you that you cannot be seen for a year. And yes, I have waited an entire year before being seen for my back and knee's. Both problems sustained while in the service to this country. And both brushed off as "minor" issues when I got back from Afghanistan and had 2 months left in. Because Military health care is just as horrible as the VA health care.

Their response to getting appointments for things like colds, the flu, and other normal every day illnesses that you may or may not need some prescriptions meds for, was always "Go to the emergency room".
In fact, I was told to do that on more than one occasion. One of them being when I had a piece of a wire brush embedded in my iris. The guy told me to come on down, and by the time I got there (15 minutes later) he had left for lunch. I had to go to the emergency room to get it removed.

 

[Nova_C]

I guess that freedom is malleable, then. Forcing health insurance companies to take on clients they don't want, forcing state governments to accept business from out of state companies they haven't approved of, telling health insurance companies what they are allowed to charge are all violations of that freedom you cherish.

Of course, I consider the freedom provided by ensuring a minimum standard of care for all citizens to be one of the most important. I have the freedom to go to any doctor I wish. If I have a health problem, I have the freedom to get the care I need. No insurance company gets to tell me what doctors I can see, what treatments I can get, how many times I can even ask a doctor's advice.

I spent a long time never going to the doctor. In my late 20s, I finally started seeing the same GP I went to as a child. After my first visit, my doctor wanted me back in a month for a follow up. While I was on my way out, I asked the nurse at the front desk how many times I can see the doctor before I have to start paying for it out of pocket. You know what she told me?

"The government can't tell you how sick you are."

But in the US, insurance companies sure can, and do all the time.

I don't see how that can be considered freedom.

 

[Nova_C]

And see, that is how it is different here. We are not automatically covered by the government, even under the ACA. They do not purchase the equipment and supplies via tax revenue.

We are forced to buy health care, that is still privately owned. And if we cannot prove that we have health care, we will have to pay the government via a "tax".

You can thank the Republicans for that.

The ACA was a much larger, more revolutionary change originally, but Universal Heath Care is seen as 'Socialism', and that's a dirty word in the US.

Honestly, I agree with you, the ACA as it stands is dumb. I think it's better than what you have now, but I'm outside looking in and I acknowledge that.

However, if you can push your government to implement single payer, I think you'd see a massive improvement in cost reduction without sacrificing quality.

 

[tsst]

As someone who lives in a system with single payer, it's pretty rad.

How can a huge reduction in quality be considered rad?

... Of course, I consider the freedom provided by ensuring a minimum standard of care for all citizens to be one of the most important. I have the freedom to go to any doctor I wish. If I have a health problem, I have the freedom to get the care I need. No insurance company gets to tell me what doctors I can see, what treatments I can get, how many times I can even ask a doctor's advice.

I spent a long time never going to the doctor. In my late 20s, I finally started seeing the same GP I went to as a child. After my first visit, my doctor wanted me back in a month for a follow up. While I was on my way out, I asked the nurse at the front desk how many times I can see the doctor before I have to start paying for it out of pocket. You know what she told me?

"The government can't tell you how sick you are."

...

The Canadian gov can't tell you how sick you are but they can and do tell you how long you have to wait to be treated. :shrugs:

... However, if you can push your government to implement single payer, I think you'd see a massive improvement in cost reduction without sacrificing quality.

You must be joking, right?!

 

[Duae]

How can a huge reduction in quality be considered rad?

Going 8 ranks higher in quality, Canada is better than the US! We're 38th in the world. Pretty much the rest of the world has gone to single payer and seen improvements in quality and effectiveness.

My mother was a doctor in a hospital before she passed away, and she joked how doctors would come down from Canada lured by the promise of setting their own rates and getting rich quick. They'd pack up after a year and rush home because after all the legal mumbo jumbo the insurance companies are strangling our healthcare system with, they'd be being paid a lot more, and making a lot less!

 

[HerpsOfNM]

http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_...-their-health-insurance?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=1

I found it somewhat interesting...

The comments section though is worthy of a huge 44oz soda and an xl popcorn.

 

[tsst]

Going 8 ranks higher in quality, Canada is better than the US! We're 38th in the world. Pretty much the rest of the world has gone to single payer and seen improvements in quality and effectiveness.

My mother was a doctor in a hospital before she passed away, and she joked how doctors would come down from Canada lured by the promise of setting their own rates and getting rich quick. They'd pack up after a year and rush home because after all the legal mumbo jumbo the insurance companies are strangling our healthcare system with, they'd be being paid a lot more, and making a lot less!

We are 38th overall ranked by WHO not quality ranked. BTW Canada was 30th on the WHO ranking. Even according to the WHO the US is #1 in responsiveness and quality. We suck at things like life expectancy and infant mortality. Those things are more attributable to the American lifestyle than care. We are fat lazy and over indulgent by choice.

Many from Canada and most single payer countries that can afford to pay come here. Cleveland Clinic, for example according to their website, has treated people from 132 different countries. Why would someone from a single payer country want to travel to another country and pay for services that they can get for "free"? Quality. Our healthcare is second to none. Our mode of paying is what is broke.

In need of more tax revenue.... taxes need to double to sustain Canadian system


5 part article on getting a doctor in Canada ...


Next day CT scan in Canada ... if you're a dog.