Nationalized Healthcare in the Stimulus Package????

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
A

AgentDrazenPetrovic

Anyone But the Lakers
Joined
Sep 16, 2008
Messages
7,779
Likes
34
Points
48
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_mccaughey&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs

Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).

The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis.” According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and “learn to operate less like solo practitioners.”
Click to expand...
 
It's not even called the Stimulus bill anymore. It's now the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The Democrats have given up the ghost that this is anything but a big, wet, sloppy payoff to their supporters.
 
AgentDrazenPetrovic said:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_mccaughey&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs
Click to expand...

Wow. Way to link to an opinion column by a right-wing nutjob as some sort of fact.

By the way, that "new bureaucracy" that McCaughey references in her opinion column is - in fact - not new. It was created by the Bush administration in 2004. And nowhere in the bill does it say that the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology will monitor doctors or treatments.

McCaughey's goal was a scare tactic approach to snuggle up to her extremist right-wingers.

Lame. I can't wait until these butthurt republicans stop whining about the election and trying to sabotage any attempt at progress.

This is not a perfect bill. There's no way any kind of bill like this possibly could be.

But don't try to pick holes in the thing by drastically misinterpreting provisions.

-Pop
 
whats the problem with free healthcare? im all for it. id rather feed and take care of the poor than occupy other countries. thats just me though, maybe some of you would rather occupy other countries than take care of people in need in our own country.
 
SodaPopinski said:
Lame. I can't wait until these butthurt republicans stop whining about the election and trying to sabotage any attempt at progress.

-Pop
Click to expand...

So, exactly what did the Democrats do in Congress when President Bush was in office? I believe they ran on the slogan, "Fuck America, The Party Is More Important"
 
drexlersdad said:
whats the problem with free healthcare? im all for it. id rather feed and take care of the poor than occupy other countries. thats just me though, maybe some of you would rather occupy other countries than take care of people in need in our own country.
Click to expand...

Free healthcare would be sweet. However, someone has to pay for it. If you want fewer services at greater cost, you go on ahead.
 
Notice how its a paraphrase of what they think it says. That way it is easier to get their right wing hater cracks in, and make you think it does things it does not. Let me see what can we do...Lets make it look like this health plan is linked to a health gistapo and people will associate it with the Nazi party, that will make it fail!

The goals of the legislation are actually to streamline our medical system in order to reduce costs. The office you mentioned, is to assure that insurance companies are not denying americans health care, not to control your life.

Good try though. You might as well just start a new thread every day called "I hate Obama". Then followed by "I hate Obama 2" . Followed by "I hate Obama 3".
 
drexlersdad said:
whats the problem with free healthcare? im all for it. id rather feed and take care of the poor than occupy other countries. thats just me though, maybe some of you would rather occupy other countries than take care of people in need in our own country.
Click to expand...

Nothing, but to think that nationalized healthcare is "free" is hilarious.
 
maxiep said:
So, exactly what did the Democrats do in Congress when President Bush was in office? I believe they ran on the slogan, "Fuck America, The Party Is More Important"
Click to expand...

Bush did enough to "Fuck America" with or without the Democrats' help.

-Pop
 
hasoos said:
Notice how its a paraphrase of what they think it says. That way it is easier to get their right wing hater cracks in, and make you think it does things it does not. Let me see what can we do...Lets make it look like this health plan is linked to a health gistapo and people will associate it with the Nazi party, that will make it fail!

The goals of the legislation are actually to streamline our medical system in order to reduce costs. The office you mentioned, is to assure that insurance companies are not denying americans health care, not to control your life.

Good try though. You might as well just start a new thread every day called "I hate Obama". Then followed by "I hate Obama 2" . Followed by "I hate Obama 3".
Click to expand...

These kinds of comments crack me up. One must never criticize the policies of His High Holiness. To do so is to "hate" him. I don't hate President Obama. I think his policies are wrong, but he seems like an okay guy. If you want to see real hate, check the left's obsession with former President Bush. Now THAT's hate.
 
maxiep said:
Are you saying the Democrats put the country ahead of their own Party?
Click to expand...

The Dems were definitely guilty of partisanship, but for the most part I believe they stood up against Bush because they didn't believe his policies were what was best for the country. And the majority of Americans agreed with them over the course of the final half of Bush's second term. So, in that respect, you could make a pretty strong argument that Congress was merely representing the will of the people.

Right now, however, I don't think the Republicans in Congress are representing the will of the people. The majority of Americans support the stimulus bill, and I fully believe these Republicans view this economic package as Obama's first big move and they feel that if they can ruin it they'll torpedo his momentum and garner some support in the next congressional election cycle.

-Pop
 
SodaPopinski said:
The Dems were definitely guilty of partisanship, but for the most part I believe they stood up against Bush because they didn't believe his policies were what was best for the country. And the majority of Americans agreed with them over the course of the final half of Bush's second term. So, in that respect, you could make a pretty strong argument that Congress was merely representing the will of the people.

Right now, however, I don't think the Republicans in Congress are representing the will of the people. The majority of Americans support the stimulus bill, and I fully believe these Republicans view this economic package as Obama's first big move and they feel that if they can ruin it they'll torpedo his momentum and garner some support in the next congressional election cycle.

-Pop
Click to expand...

The Republicans are representing the will of everyone who doesn't think the best way to deal with an overleveraged population is to heap more debt on them. So far, the polls say the majority of the people are against this bill, so I would say the Republicans are representing the will of the people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top