Ideas for Change in America

  • Improved Medicare for All

    A single payer, Medicare for All national health insurance program could save over $400 billion annually now wasted on overhead and bureaucracy, enough to cover all 47 million uninsured Americans.  It would allow patients to go to the private doctor or hospital of their choice with no more HMO restrictions.  Private insurance is a defective product that costs too much and covers too little - three-fourths of all bankruptcies for medical bills are among people who have insurance.  We have 44 years of positive experience with Medicare taking care of our nation's most vulnerable patients - seniors, the disabled, and people with kidney failure.  Medicare for All would also allow the nation to reduce costs by buying medications in bulk, negotiating fees with doctors, and budgeting hospitals and other facilities.  It would also allow Medicare benefits to be improved (to eliminate co-pays and deductibles, to add a comprehensive, permanent drug benefit, etc).

    - Physicians for a National Health Program Feb 01 @ 09:56AM PST

Comments (258)

59 older comments see the full discussion ^

  • Penny Higgins
    Mar 03, 2010 @ 11:19AM PT
    Penny Higgins

    It is so important that we get HR676 passed! I know too many people without insurance. My son has a wife and 5 kids. He has a good job and insurance, but his co-pays are killing him, and hospital visits are NOT FREE!

    Thank you for working toward SINGLE PAYER INSURANCE!  iT IS IMPERATIVE FOR THE HEALTH OF OUR NATION!

    PENNY HIGGINS

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Dr. Floyd McDowell, Sr.
    Mar 03, 2010 @ 11:58AM PT
    Dr. Floyd McDowell, Sr.

       I researched and authored our Delaware Coalitin's (31 statewide organizations) single payer, nongovernment run Delaware Health Security Act. It's now in our state's Senate Finance Committee as Senate Bill 120 with 17 State Legislator co-sponsors. It's in the STATES where sensible research-documented single payer reform will be realized. For evidence, go to pnhp.org web site. Type in the Search Window, How Much Will a Single Payer System Cost? Then scroll down or download summaries of a long list of national and state reserch studies documenting the program and cost effectiveness of single payer systems. Elected decision-makers who reject this deperately needed reform should wear PP on their clothing for the Political Prostitutes they are doing tricks for lobbyist pimps.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Bob Haiducek
      Mar 03, 2010 @ 02:56PM PT
      Bob Haiducek

      ** this is a corrected/revised copy **

      Dr. McDowell, I fully recognize and appreciate the activities of all activitists everywhere within the single-payer movement, whether that is a single-state single-payer movement or the national single-payer movement. I work closely with some people in some states who work on both the state and national movements. I live in Michigan, but my start in the movement's activities 6-7 years ago were in Ohio with SPAN-Ohio, Single-Payer Action Network - Ohio. Last I knew I was still the only out-of-state member.

      I see your obvious enthusiasm about the Delaware efforts, but you write this: "It's is in the STATES where ... single-payer reform will be realized." In the context of where your comments appear (in a national effort web page) the word "will" comes out a bit "over the edge" ... a bit negative to the national movement ... like some kind of competition.

      This does not have to be "you" and "us". Please read on ...

      I INVITE YOU SPEND 10-15 MINUTES per month to become a ONE IN A MILLION national single-payer movement participant.

      After all, as a very personal plea for me and for millions of others, your participation and your encouragement to have others participate could very well mean that 308 million people may get an improved Medicare for All very soon by having the campaign be successful.

      It's worth the risk of your investing only 10-15 minutes of your time each month for such a fantastic possibility of an outcome, correct?

      Thanks in advance,

      Please sign up here ...

      http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Sign_Up

      Bob Haiducek (hi' duh sek)
      Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Cheree M.
    Mar 03, 2010 @ 01:01PM PT
    Cheree M.

    Voted, All Petitions have been signed & Forwarding all petitions & info to Care2 website in a message to get more to vote & signatures on Petitions . Thank you for all you do.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Dave Bean
    Mar 03, 2010 @ 10:32PM PT
    Dave Bean

    Unbelievable the time and money wasted, when we could lower the age of eligibility to Medicare.  What happened to that proposal ??

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Dave Bean
    Mar 03, 2010 @ 10:32PM PT
    Dave Bean

    Unbelievable the time and money wasted, when we could lower the age of eligibility to Medicare.  What happened to that proposal ??

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Angela Renee
    Mar 04, 2010 @ 09:07AM PT
    Angela Renee

    Let me start by saying that I would support any honorable intentions for this program; however there is a significant amount of abuse that coincides with govt sponsored care.  (NOT from ALL caretakers, but a significant portion ) 

    I myself, I have been a pawn in doublie-billed care, bills for services never rendered, and countless additional procedures that caused personal burden on my health and further monetary burden on myself and the the Department of Veterans Affairs and fee-based medicare/caid outsouced care. 

    Curbing fraud alone may pull this country out of its finacial depths, but unless there are strict policies ensuring the curtailing of fraud in these related programs, I cannot support this.

    PLease feel free anyone to inform me of how this program is an exception in this matter and I will be happy to reconsider.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Hal Goldfarb
      Mar 04, 2010 @ 06:41PM PT
      Hal Goldfarb

      With a unified single-payer oversight group, made up of doctors, nurses, and patients and possibly others, there would be a HUGE opportunity to contain fraud and abuse.  Since these people running the program have everything to gain by ensuring that money goes for care, not greed, they will have the incentive to root out bad players and hold them accountable. 

      You can't say that about the current system at all.  Even if one were to introduce some kind of oversight of the current "free-market" system, you would still have lots of folks stealing and cheating, and that's because this current system is greed-driven, not love-driven.

      This is my own opinion, of course, but I hope this is food for thought in addressing your concern.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Angela Renee
      Mar 04, 2010 @ 09:14PM PT
      Angela Renee

      I appreciate it, thanks.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 04, 2010 @ 09:24PM PT
      Mark R

      I agree with you, Angela.  History has proven time and time again that government oversight eventually leads to corporate greed oversight.  Just take a look at the FDA for a prime example.  Privte sector corporate executives are in and out of high ranking FDA offices like there's a revolving door policy in place.

      The problem with the current system is TOO MUCH government involvement.  It sure sounds nice to think of a "love-driven" system, but reality will never allow for such.  In government, greed with trump love every time.  It always has and it always will.

      More government has never been the answer.  I can't think of one single thing we've given the government more power over that it hasn't screwed up.  Despite my long hours of reading this proposal, I've yet to see any indication that it would be any different.  The potential for plunder in a medicare for all plan is just as likely as any other government plan.

      I personally believe we need to take the government out of health care all together and let the free market work it out.  I don't see why my tax $$$ should be spent on some schmuck that has drank and smoked all his life while I'm doing everything I can to live a healthy lifestyle.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Bob Haiducek
      Mar 05, 2010 @ 08:23PM PT
      Bob Haiducek

      Angela:

      I am sure that you can appreciate that a massive, complex system means many opportunities for waste, fraud and abuse.

      Correspondingly, a simple system means far fewer opportunities for waste, fraud and abuse.

      Improved Medicare for All creates simplicity via single-payer health care.

      At this link you can learn about THREE types of bureaucractic complexity that will be eliminated by an improved Medicare for All.

      http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Bureaucracy

      YEAH FOR SIMPLICITY.

      - Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Hal Goldfarb
      Apr 03, 2010 @ 11:09PM PT
      Hal Goldfarb

      Mark R:

      If we applied the principle of unregulated markets to this forum, perhaps its management would decide you are a bad risk to this community.  Your anti-social remarks and attitude might offend some people, driving them away forever.  Loss of users means potential loss of credibility and maybe even revenue.  And you can't "externalize" the real costs!  It costs money to host this website, to promote it, etc. How much time is Dr. Haiducek donating?  It may be free for YOU to use, but it is not completely free to operate. Thus, perhaps the owner could terminate your account for having a pre-existing attitude.

      Obviously, neither you nor me would agree with such a policy.  So, why is it that equality in speech does not apply to equality in healthcare?

      The other problem with your argument:  Do you know how much a single bout of cancer costs?  The first round is usually the most expensive as I understand it, costing somewhere in the neighborhood of $50,000 to about $80,000 (last I heard).  Doctor Haiducek, how much does it cost?  Are the cancer professionals ripping off the system somehow?  Why haven't free market forces driven down the cost of treatment?

      Most Americans are not earning anywhere close to an income that could pay for such treatment.  Sure, for poor people, there is always America's Health Clinic (the emergency room).  Unfortunately, their billing rates are even higher.  And then people like the belly achers here end up having to foot the bill.  So the whole argument against Single Payer health care collapses.

       

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Apr 06, 2010 @ 10:40AM PT
      Mark R

      OK, I'll address this one simply because you've set me up so perfectly to make my point.

      First of all, just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I have an attitude. You take it as such simply because you're intolerant. You have no room for disagreement in your mind. To you, disagreement = attitude.

      Now, let's talk about cancer. Would you like to know why we don't have a cure for cancer today? It's specifically BECAUSE of government.  Of course, if you had taken the time to read my other posts, you'd already know this.  Take some time and read the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act enforced by the FDA. You'll soon learn that this act is single handedly responsible for preventing doctors or companies from stating that a food or supplement can prevent or cure ANY disease. The average person knows that that is pure BS, but that's the law. If a doctor says "You need to eat less sugar and more veggies to help fight cancer" that doctor is setting themselves up to lose their license.

      If you want to read how to cure cancer, search for and study the works of Dr. Otto Warburg. He won a Nobel Prize for his discoveries on cancer cell respiration and would have won a second had he not been a Jew in Germany during Hitler's rule. I've personally used his research to help people reverse their cancer.

      So, as you can see, when it comes to health care, there's no such thing as a free market. The government is completely in the way and we'll never see a free market health care system. That doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for one.

      Your conclusion that the argument against single payer health care is seriously flawed by your overly simplistic views and lack of understanding of a very complex subject.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Blue Ape With A Drum
    Mar 04, 2010 @ 04:52PM PT
    Blue Ape With A Drum

    I work in the British National Health Service,which takes no payment at the point of delivery.Every citizen is covered,as we pay for the service through general taxation..no person,regardless of income or ability to pay is turned away.

    The service is far cheaper for us as a nation  than the healthcare received by Americans.No one loses their house,trying to make payments..and being the victim of long term illness is not treated as an expensive crime.

    I don't make money for anyone in my job..nor as a patient..I am not evil..and have never sat on a death panel.

    Without our universal public health care system many people would have died..before we had it,people would die of treatable/preventable causes,because they lacked the means to buy healthcare.These people weren't lazy..they worked harder than most other people..they just happened to be manual workers.

    Healthcare ,like clean water,shelter,food and freedom from tyranny is e basic human right..all advanced countries accept this principle.It is sad that the hegemony in America has been so skewered towards the needs of the wealthy ..this has resulted in a large number of resistant and powerful vested interests being allowed to stave off real healthcare reform,as enough people have been hoodwinked by these to beleive that single payer is communistic,Marxist,unAmerican,unaffordable etc.

    Once a single payer type system is bedded in though,it is very very hard for the greedmongers,speculators and crazy right wingers to get rid of it..as people generally appreciate that the alternative..ie a system resembling that of  present day America..is unfair,not universal,expensive and benefits only the few..

    Good luck America and keep fighting...it's worth it. 

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Bob Haiducek
      Mar 04, 2010 @ 07:23PM PT
      Bob Haiducek

      Excellent set of comments. Thank you. Following is a web page that shows the statistics related to your words ("...people would die of treatable/preventable causes,because they lacked the means to buy healthcare."

      http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Real_People

      The web page documents that the U.S. was 15th out of 19 countries in a 2003 report ... for minimizing deaths due to preventable diseases ..... and we went down to rock-bottom, dead-last as per a 2008 report. THERE IS AN UNNECESSARY  AMERICAN DEATH EVERY 5 MINUTES related to what you wrote ... that people don't get to the doctor as often as other countries ... because they cannot afford it.

      In the time it took me to compose this another American died unnecessarily.

      Vote for this idea, and sign up here to get the solution.

      http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Sign_Up

      Bob Haiducek, Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 04, 2010 @ 09:36PM PT
      Mark R

      Blue Ape, you said "Healthcare ,like clean water,shelter,food and freedom from tyranny is e basic human right."

      I'm sorry, I just don't agree with this.  Call me cold and calloused if you want, but I do not and will not agree that any person has the RIGHT to the services of another human being.  Calling it "health care services" might make it sound more palatable, but the bottom line is that you're demanding that someone who went through a LOT of training, schooling, internship and experience perform their services for less than the market will bear.  I'd wager that most anyone outside the medical industry would be infuriated if they were suddenly demanded to render their services at a government set price.  It's unclear to me why the medical profession should be any different.

      No, I'm not in favor of America's status quo.  I think we currently have the worst system in the world... but I think it's because of TOO MUCH government involvement.  When America had the best health care in the world (many decades ago) it was specifically BECAUSE it was a free market system.  Over the years, corporations took a stronghold on the government and started changing laws to prevent competition in the medical field.  It's the lack of competition in practically every area of medicine (coupled with a horrible food supply) that has made our system so bad.  Personally, I'd like to see all insurance go away, except maybe for major medical for covering accidents and life threatening diseases.

      I just don't understand how people think it's noble to demand some of the most educated and skilled people in our society voluntarily and drastically reduce their salary "for the greater good."  America was built on capitalism.  That proposal is decidedly anti-capitalistic.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Bob Haiducek
      Mar 05, 2010 @ 08:07PM PT
      Bob Haiducek

      About free-market health care: why it's not applicable like it was decades ago ...
      https://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Free-Market_Health_Care

      About the very positive impact of an improved Medicare for All on physicians' incomes:

      https://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Answers#physicianincome

      - Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Bob Haiducek
      Mar 05, 2010 @ 08:14PM PT
      Bob Haiducek

      Improved Medicare for All means MUCH LESS GOVERNMENT, both federal and state.

      http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Government_Bureaucracy

      - Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 05, 2010 @ 09:00PM PT
      Mark R

      If you're going to debate free market health care, why in the world would you go all the way back to the 1800s?  I think going back to the 1950s would do just fine.  The era just before insurance became a "necessity" would be the most useful when discussing free market health care.  I doubt there was a lot of bartering by food in the 50s.  Seems like a stretch to use such an argument in an intelligent debate.

      Regarding your link on physician's income, it says:

      "— no need to pay for a large billing staff or a billing service" - The same is true for a no-insurance, free market system.

      "— no need to pay for any staff person to call a health insurance company to ask for permission to give health care." - see above reply.


      "— a dramatic reduction in malpractice premiums, since a patient can only sue for a mistake, not the cost of health care for the rest of their lives." - It is absolutely IMPERATIVE that doctors be held accountable for their mistakes... and even more importantly that people be compensated properly for lost income potential. With the government in control of health care, rights to sue will most likely be further restricted under the guise of tort reform to "save the system" from undue expenses... at the expense of the victims.

      I've already read the "less government" page, and I don't disagree with it... but you know what would result in even less government than medicare for all?  A completely free market system where people pay for the services they use and nothing more.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Ethan Genauer
    Mar 04, 2010 @ 11:17PM PT
    Ethan Genauer

    I have an idea: Let's form an alliance! Everyone who voted for this idea, please also vote for my idea, "Good Food For All Kids: A Garden in Every School."

    http://www.change.org/ideas/view/good_food_for_all_kids_a_garden_at_every_school_2

    Guess what -- Lots of kids today have a terrible diet, a leading cause of many health problems and disease. One of the best ways to improve child nutrition is to teach them about healthy vegetarian eating through a school garden program! 

    Please vote ... it's a great idea, I'm sure you'll agree!

     

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Mark R
      Mar 05, 2010 @ 09:10PM PT
      Mark R

      Ethan, I've been teaching my kids about healthy eating their entire lives.  You know what they do when I'm not around?  They binge on junk food, because they're kids.  They just know that junk food tastes good.  We don't have any in the house, so they get it at their friends' houses.

      If we really want to change America's diet, we need to take the government out of our food supply.  Food subsidies are destroying America's health bu making grain crops artificially cheap... meaning it's cheaper to make sugar from corn than it is from cane.  It means it's cheaper to truck in grain for beef cattle and pump them full of antibiotics and hormones than it is to let them roam on green grass.

      Food subsidies is yet another example of government's good intentions that have backfired on the American public.  Clinton tried to phase out subsidies, but Bush reinstated them early in his first term... then expanded them. We pay between $10B and $18Billion per year for farmers to grow junk food crops.  If those payments stop, the farmers will most likely resort to the next highest profiting crops... organics.  ;)

      Less government = problem solved.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Terry Adcock
    Mar 06, 2010 @ 06:06AM PT
    Terry Adcock

    There is a troll infesting this site who talks about a "free market system," as if one has ever existed in the United States.  Since the founding of the Republic, our economic "system" has been manipulated by persons of great wealth to protect them from accountability when they cause great harm to the rest of us using our rigged economy for their own greed.  

    Further, the troll talks about the 1950's as if there were a "free market" for health care then.  That is delusional.  The American Medical Association (AMA), then one of the strongest and most powerful unions in the world, fought any efforts to bring market influences to bear on the cost of health care in this country.  The AMA has since been replaced by the medical insurance cartels to assure there was no market for "market principles" (as if those "principles" ever existed).  The troll appears to have no plan for getting those cartels out of the "marketplace."

    The troll's faith in the "free market" would be pathetic, if it weren't an ignorant reflection of the same kind of nonsense spewed out by Ron Paul and his fellow Libertines. 

    What would be the "fair market value" of a treatment over four years for an invasive form of cancer?  How long would a person of moderate income need to save up for such an occurrence?  This is not a question for the troll.  The troll is delusional.  This is a question for those of us who are rational, to show the troll for what it is.

    I have asked everyone posting to this Idea to ignore the troll, and not answer his delusions about some fanciful faith-based "free market."  I renew my request: Please do not try to answer the hair-brained idiocy of this delusional troll.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 06, 2010 @ 08:30AM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      AMEN Terry!!! You hit the Nail dead on the Head, concerning the Economy, the Insurance Company's as well as the "TROLL" from Texas. I lived there for 35 Years until I retired, but I left just as soon as I could, LOL.

      He keeps pushing the "Talking Point" about "LESS GOVERNMENT" and I am reminded of Haiti,( a classic example of "LESS GOVERNMENT"), when the Earthquake came they had no Government agency to take charge and provide support, just "Rent-a-Cops" to protect the wealthy. This also reminds me of our last experiment with "LESS GOVERNMENT",( in the hands of another TEXICAN), I'm speaking, of course, about New Orleans and Katrina. I would suggest that all of these,"LESS GOVERNMENT" People move to Haiti, it would be their Paradise. They could hire some Rent-a-Cops, to protect them from the Pesants and have it made.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 07, 2010 @ 06:32AM PT
      Mark R

       

      You know, Terry, one of the most dishonest debating tactics is known as "straw man." If you're not familiar with it, look it up, because it's what you're doing.

      Name calling is also one of the weakest logical fallacies in debate. If you want to debate this issue, let's get to it. Otherwise you're just making yourself look like a lying bully. It's not like people can't read exactly what I said. It's right there.

      As for Ron Paul, he warned the country all the back in the 80s that the Fed was going to lead us into financial turmoil in the housing market. He even tried to push through an "Audit the Fed" bill back then, but no one would listen. Now that it has finally happened, he has over 300 co-sponsors on his new Audit the Fed bill. He's a champion of personal liberties that you liberals normally can't shut up about. I'd think any civil liberty minded liberal would be a HUGE Ron Paul supporter.

      I love how you refer to me as "the troll" and talk about me in the 3rd person. It's almost cute... because it's evidence that you're not equipped to go toe to toe with me in a rational, evidence based debate. You'd just rather make up stuff and call me names.

      Curtis, Haiti is NOT an example of less government. It's an example of a massively corrupt government and a poor population.  http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60P3HN20100126

       

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 07, 2010 @ 06:46AM PT
      Mark R

      Curtis, to continue my reply... First, It's "Texan" not "Texican." George W. Bush was initially elected on a *promise* of less government and a humble foreign policy, but then he took office and made a 180 degree turn. There was no Department of Homeland Security before Bush took office. He also increased funding to several major federal government agencies like the Department of Education, starting "No Child Left Behind." I agree with none of it.... especially the Iraq invasion. Iraq was not a threat to the U.S. and was not harboring any of the terrorists we were after at the time. Evidence supporting the presence of WMDs was sketchy at best... and GW's actions have created much of the financial turmoil our nation faces today.

      It's yet another example of more government being a bad idea.

      I suggest you read the book "More Liberty Means Less Government" by Walter E. Williams.

      http://www.amazon.com/More-Liberty-Means-Less-Government/dp/0817996125

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Neil Blonstein
    Mar 07, 2010 @ 05:36AM PT
    Neil Blonstein

    Preventitive medicince must be included: fitness centers, gyms, and swimmining pools.  Obesity in America  and other countries will make the quality of life go down. I am miserable if I don't get to the gym twice a week. If medicare  will include gyms in healthcare, overall healthcare costs will drop.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 07, 2010 @ 06:33AM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      I totally agree Neil, But I would prefer "LOCAL" Community Centers, with BB Courts, Weight Room, Indoor and outdoor Pools, indoor and outdoor Walking/running tracks,etc. I lived in a small Town in NW Louisiana, for a short time after Retiring and they had a fine Center,Free to the Public and the little Town had NO major Industry, to help support such a Venture, the People just wanted it, so they built it........

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Amy Engle
    Mar 07, 2010 @ 08:44AM PT
    Amy Engle

    So was the nations health better in the fities or prior due to less government involvement? The answer is "No". We can talk about the free market or any other ideologies but the real question should be centered around our actual health.

    Single payer has so many selling points but I think the most notable is our nations health which is very important. We do not want disease and cancers to run rampant. In the poorest countries these very issues plague people every day and they prohibit a healthy enduring work force.

    We've always had inequalities in health care due to economics. The underlining meaning to these policies is that the worth of life of the poor is not as important as that of  rich persons.

    The best sollution is to cooperate with eachother for the best outcome for everyone. Call that socialism but many studdies show the importance of cooperation vs. competition. By working together we can fullfill our best interests. Single payer is the key to this. It controls cost and it actual puts our health as the top agenda rather then the insurance companies.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Terry Adcock
      Mar 07, 2010 @ 11:31AM PT
      Terry Adcock

      The "free market - less government" argument is a "Lucy and the football vs. Charlie Brown" scam to side track a conversation between those of us who believe that decent health care is a human right (1,489 of us, as of now) about how we actually achieve the goal of the Idea of "Improved Medicare for All."

      Entering into the troll's delusions is a non-starter and a Lucy ploy.

      Reference has been made over and over to the "Medicare for All" website (http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Home) which has some excellent suggestions for moving this Idea to fruition.  Perhaps if we discussed what we are doing to make this a reality, instead of falling for the troll's "Lucy tactics," we would all be better off. 

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 08, 2010 @ 10:20AM PT
      Mark R

      Amy, you've completely missed the point. It's not about whether health was better in the 50s than it is now. We'd have to move backwards for that to be the case... and in many ways, we have.

      The point is about comparison with other countries during a time when America's health care was considered the best. The ONLY reason a Medicare For All system is even considerable is because the current American system has gone so far off course. We absolutely DO NOT currently have a free market system when doctors (or anyone else) are not legally allowed to tell their patients that a food or supplement can cure or prevent disease. We also have government stepping all over the toes of the health care system. Our current system is worse than single payer systems specifically *BECAUSE* of government involvement... and here we have people proposing that we use the government to fix a problem the government started to begin with.

      My beef is that we've gotten so far of track that we're considering handing our inept government the most critical service of every American's life rather than fixing the parts that are broke.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 08, 2010 @ 10:37AM PT
      Mark R

      I love that you're ignoring me, Terry. I find it interesting that when you failed to have me removed you've instead turned to the silent treatment.

      The irony of pushing this idea as patriotic and then in the same breath trying to shut me up is staggering. Nothing could be more unpatriotic than trying to silence someone with whom you disagree. I'm reminded of a saying that reverberates with all of my military friends and family, which says "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

      Rather than respectfully disagreeing with me, your socialist mindset would rather just shut me up. Contrary info and data to something you hold dear is met with hostility because you've already made up your mind that you know what what's best for me, my family and all other Americans. Your hubris is sickening.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Lynn Huidekoper, RN
      Mar 11, 2010 @ 09:17PM PT
      Lynn Huidekoper, RN

      Mark R,

      Why are you so angry?  FYI-you pay 1.45% of every paycheck for Medicare Part A when you reach 65. If you ask anyone 65+ if they want you to take away their Medicare benefits they will say absolutely no!

      You also benefit from the (buzz word) "socialized" police, fire, school, library ,roads that you drive on, garbage collection,etc. I doubt that you and your family could do without these services.

      The only socialized health care systems in the world are England, Spain, and the VA system in America. Medicare doe not own the hospitals, doctors,etc. It's merely a public insurance system that pays for a private health care system.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 12, 2010 @ 07:44AM PT
      Mark R

      Why is it you think I'm angry? From what I see, I'm the one constantly being attacked while trying, in vein I might add, to get an honest debate going.

      I've already answered your questions in posts that are still on this board.

      Government is for public infrastructure and defense of personal liberties... period.  I believe that our government doesn't do any of the above very efficiently. Government contracts for infrastructure projects are constantly full of pork and given to buddies of elected officials. It's not about who can do the best job. It's about who you know. If our public education system was so great, why can't we get school vouchers? What do our public schools have to worry about?

      I do NOT believe that a human being has the *RIGHT* to another human being's services at a government (or insurance company) set price. I believe doctor's should be able to charge whatever the market will allow. Competition would keep costs down.

      As much as people like to talk about eliminating the middle man, going to a MFA system would not do that. True we won't be paying some 8 figure salary to some chump who doesn't deserve it, but I believe the history of inefficiencies in government programs will probably make up for the high salaries.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Curtis Mulkey
    Mar 07, 2010 @ 12:09PM PT
    Curtis Mulkey

    I couldn't agree more Terry, This is a "Comment" Board on the subject of "Single Payer", "NOT for Profit Health Care", not a damn "Debating Society". I am 70 years old, but spend eight to ten hours a Day,( most Days) out in my Garden, where I am growing my own, from Bananas to Tomatoes and all kinds of Citrus. I don't have any time to waste, talking to a Brick.

    On the Subject of SPUHC though, I have been studying and advocating for it since 2005. I have links out the yazoo, for anyone who is serious.........

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Curtis Mulkey
    Mar 08, 2010 @ 05:08AM PT
    Curtis Mulkey

    I just received my FLARA News Letter which contained this quote from Tony;

    "It is time to let the Majority rule on the issue of "Health Care"

    The minority 

    should ask themselves , how many more people will die before we allow adffordable health care." 

     Tony Fransetta

      President; Florida Alliance for Retired Americans

     

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Curtis Mulkey
    Mar 08, 2010 @ 06:49AM PT
    Curtis Mulkey

    To: Bob and ALL;

    This article was in there, which is directly related to our issue. It explains the unconstitutionally of the Republican tactics being used to kill Health Care and how it can and MUST be corrected...;

    http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2010/0303/Obama-health-care-reconciliation-save-your-outrage-for-the-unconstitutional-filibuster

     

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Bob Haiducek
      Mar 08, 2010 @ 09:10AM PT
      Bob Haiducek

      Thanks, Curtis. No matter whether health care passes or not, we can and will get an improved Medicare for All. - Bob

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 08, 2010 @ 01:19PM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      Glad to help Bob and I agree..........

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 09, 2010 @ 01:46PM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      Here's another Jewel Bob.........

      http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03052010/watch3.html

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 09, 2010 @ 03:51PM PT
      Mark R

      It's great to see responsible discussion about the current health care bill.  I've been saying for months now that, in its current form, it would be even worse than the hodge podge system we have in place now.  I hope that everyone who watches that video takes away one very important message... which is that if we don't change our system, we're going to end up a 3rd world country.  Be it MFA or complete elimination of all but major medical insurance and revision of food law, *something* must be done.

      Thanks for posting the video.  It was well worth the time to watch it.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 09, 2010 @ 05:44PM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      I am glad you enjoyed it and you are welcome.I agree with your assessment of the direction the Country is headed in and further, I believe we are much  closer than we are being led to believe by the Media and Politicians. Personally I have prepared for any eventuality. My place in Florida,( where I can grow Organic Vegetables year round) is paid for and I have Medicare already. My fight is for my Grandchildren,( who live three miles down the Road) have it also. It's not that I don't agree with SOME of your points,( about a healthy Diet,etc.), its just that I have always found that in order to ACOMPLISH anything, one must Focus and at Seventy years old, I don't have time to cure all of the Country's ills, just one at a time......

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Bob Haiducek
      Mar 10, 2010 @ 04:43PM PT
      Bob Haiducek

      Thanks. Curtis. for that link to the interview with my fellow PNHP member Dr. Marcia Angell. I've heard her speak at national PNHP meetings over the years, so I knew she would have excellent information. I was thinkiing originally that it was a re-broadcast of the similar program from 2009, so I am especially thankful.

      You are responsible for initiating a new section of the website, as per the link to "Interviews"

      http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Education

      Select "Interviews" in the right column. Then select the first (and currently only) entry to the interview.

      As you will find, I added bolding and notes to highlight her excellent points and to add a bit more information in at least one case.

      Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 10, 2010 @ 05:57PM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      you are, of course, welcome Bob. I am a subscriber to the PNHP News Letter as well, plus many other organizations, I keep my ear pretty close to the ground,( survival instinct, I guess). I am honored at being responsible for a "new section" of the Web Page. I ran over and checked it out,Super!

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • J. Ethan Jacobs
    Mar 08, 2010 @ 08:37AM PT
    J. Ethan Jacobs

       As soon as we are finished tinkering with reform of health INSURANCE, -- win, lose, or draw -- it is time to begin reform of health CARE.  Here are three ideas to start:

       1)  Eliminate monopoly profits on drugs and medical devices – NIH already provides much of the financing for basic research, and much of drug company research is only trying to get around a competitor’s patents.

       2)  Encourage more clinics with salaried physicians on the model of Mayo and Cleveland Clinics where care is excellent and costs modest.

       3)  Subsidize medical schools so that we can graduate more physicians and physicians who don’t have to charge high fees in order to pay off crushing student loans.

     

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Mark R
      Mar 08, 2010 @ 10:42AM PT
      Mark R

      There you go, J. Ethan. That's what I'm talking about... and an idea I keep trying to convey here. Our problem is with the system... not the insurance. I mean, yes, we have insurance problems, but if we could focus our attention on the system (both the health care system as well as the food supply system) our nation would become healthier and the need for something like Medicare for All would be greatly reduced.

      I mean, what would you rather have... better health where you never have to go to the doctor or poor health but all the doctor visits paid for?

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 08, 2010 @ 01:11PM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      I agree with all three Ethan and I know for a fact that Obama is working on #3.......

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Sally Gellert
      Mar 08, 2010 @ 04:59PM PT
      Sally Gellert

      Curtis,

      It strikes me as odd that at this time of national deficits, the president should be working on more spending, rather than doing the hard work of #1 or #2.  Yes, monopolies are difficult to break up—if we believe that some banks are “too big to fail”, we seem to actually prefer fewer, larger institutions—and changing income structure is never easy, always scary for those involved, but simply subsidizing high-cost education rather than examining the reasons for that high cost and addressing shows how we are in the reform-effort mess that we are now in—put on Band-Aids, patch things up here and there, kick the cost problem down the road, but don’t ever discuss making the system simpler, more economical, or more humane.  I fear that we will be fighting this fight way too long.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 08, 2010 @ 05:44PM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      Well Sally, first of all I don't know that the President is NOT working on #1, or #2,( He doesn't report to me), I just happened to hear him talking about something in the neighborhood of # 3 and he indicated being in favor of it due to the fact that we don't have enough GP's,( General Practitioners) and one of the stipulations would be that they agree to work in an under served area for two years.

      Now, that being said, I am not here to defend the President. I Campaigned for and Voted for CHANGE. All I have seen,( so far) is "BUSH LITE". He sat around on his Butt and let the Health Care Bill drag out too long trying to kiss Republican's butts. He just can't seem to come to grips with the FACT, that he just can't make everyone love him.........

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Jose Sanchez
    Mar 09, 2010 @ 06:21AM PT
    Jose Sanchez

    I Like this idea as long as one can purchase additional insurance, if it is needed.

    Medicare is already caring for our elderly so it makes sense to expand it to include all americans so no american is without health care.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Hal Goldfarb
      Mar 09, 2010 @ 09:39PM PT
      Hal Goldfarb

      It would cover everything, except maybe elective surgery.

      What would you want additional health insurance for exactly?  Just curious.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Jose Sanchez
      Mar 10, 2010 @ 03:46PM PT
      Jose Sanchez

      Just making sure one has that option if a condition is not covered. This plan does make a lot of sense to me. I wish more people would stop and take a it.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Jose Sanchez
      Mar 10, 2010 @ 03:55PM PT
      Jose Sanchez

      Sorry. The last sentence I meant to write.

      I wish more people would take a look at this idea.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Lynn Huidekoper, RN
    Mar 09, 2010 @ 10:17PM PT
    Lynn Huidekoper, RN

    Hal,

    The term elective surgery means ANY surgery that is desired that isn't urgent, life-saving. For example, a total knee or hip replacement is elective because the pt. decides when they elect to have the surgery done. This kind  of surgery is covered as the replacement is eventually needed so that folks with arthritis can get around with less pain.

    I have a feeling that what you meant was non-necessary elective surgery such as cosmetic surgery for vanity purposes. If the plastic surgery is to repair a burn that would be covered. But tummy tucks, eyelid fixes, botox, facelifts, etc. would not be covered and paid for out of pocket as most are paid for now. I don't think any insurance covers those.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Hal Goldfarb
      Mar 25, 2010 @ 01:25AM PT
      Hal Goldfarb

      Lynn: 

      With all due respect to the curent industry-defined terminology, to me "elective" means just that.  I choose to have something done, not because it is recommended by a doctor.  If a hip replacement is necessary to lessen pain, then as far as I am concerned, it is non-elective surgery, EVEN IF THE HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY SAYS OTHERWISE.  I don't care; pain is not acceptable if we truly care about hte health of all people.  I refuse to use the terminology as they have framed it.

      And, yes, I agree cosmetic surgery should not be covered in most cases.  If there is severe scarring or other problems that cause psychological or self-confidence issues, it may be necessary to perform those cosmetic surgeries to ensure the mental well-being of the patient.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • james bryan
    Mar 10, 2010 @ 05:13AM PT
    james bryan

    please donate to bryanforcongress.org    Medicare for all as a buy in is a choice that well benifit all. I also support covering ALL with this or a public option. Help me help us by donating to send me to The US Congress.     bryanforcongress.org    thanks Jim Bryan

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • james bryan
    Mar 10, 2010 @ 05:16AM PT
    james bryan

    We need Medicare for all or a public option, donate to bryanforcongress.org help me help us. Jim Bryan

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 10, 2010 @ 05:43AM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      All the best Jim, (I read your profile), but being retired and living on a fixed income, I have to conserve to help KEEP ALAN GRAYSON in the Eighth District. He is at the TOP of the Republicans "Most Wanted" list.........

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 10, 2010 @ 01:46PM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      Here's an example of why;

      Grayson introduces Public Option Act | West Orlando News Online ...
      Mar 9, 2010 ... Congressman Alan Grayson, (D-Orlando), today introduced a bill (HR 4789) which would give the option to buy into Medicare to every citizen ...
      http://westorlandonews.com/2010/03/09/grayson-introduces-public-option-act/

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 10, 2010 @ 04:00PM PT
      Mark R

      Curtis, as much a I don't like the MFA being discussed here, the article you posted frightens me even more. As has already been discussed here ad nauseum, our current medicare system is broken. The corruption in it has reached record highs.  More people buying in to the current system would just increase the corruption.

      At least with the MFA plan, the current system would be overhauled or we'd start from scratch.  Admittedly, there are far fewer holes in the MFA proposal than the current plan.

      I sincerely hope that Congressman Alan Grayson doesn't get his way. Our country can't afford it.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Curtis Mulkey
    Mar 10, 2010 @ 05:32PM PT
    Curtis Mulkey

    "Curtis, as much a I don't like the MFA being discussed here" Question. Just exactly who died and left you in charge of what we FREE AMERICANS Discuss here? I notice you don't have a Picture up, are you afraid someone at home might recognize you.

    "the article you posted frightens me even more."  I'm sure, you seem to frighten real easy.Let me do a little MATH for you. First, let me say that MFA,"Single Payer" or some form of "NOT FOR PROFIT INSURANCE" is the only thing that will work,( over the long haul) BUT  NONE of those things are on the Table right now and the Insurance Companies will But as many Politicians as they need to make sure it dosen't get there. That AND a "PUBLIC OPTION" and Now a "MEDICARE BUY IN" are the only things You and the INSURANCE Companies are afraid of, BECAUSE, they know that either of those will eventually lead to "Single Payer" and all of their Money won't be able to stop it, it will be like a run-away-Train.

    Now the MATH LESSON. If everyone is allowed to buy into Medicare, the KEY WORD is BUY in. That will mean that more, "YOUNGER" people  will be BUYING into the System, as in PAYING PREIMUMS. This will be a big help for those buying in, because they won't have to pay an adeditional 35% of every Dollar to the Insurance Companies,(1300 of them) for Bonuses, expencies,( like buying Politicians),etc.,etc. BUT It will also be a big help to Medicare, because it will have a much larger and YOUNGER risk POOL. AND ,(as I said before), once the American People see how well that is working and NO ONE is being assinated by "DEATH PANELS", there won't be enough customers left to show a profit for the insurance Companies and they will move out of Health and stay where they belong, Insuring your Pick up Truck.

     As for the coruption in the system, that is something that has to be fixed and I am hearing some good idea's as how to do that, by rewarding people for RATTING THE Crooks off. BUT adding More People to the System won't change that one way or the other, it will be revinue Neutral.........

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Mark R
    Mar 11, 2010 @ 06:25AM PT
    Mark R

    "Just exactly who died and left you in charge of what we FREE AMERICANS Discuss here?"

    Perhaps you'd like to show me *where* I've tried to stop your discussion.... hmmm? From my point of view, discussion is *EXACTLY* what I've been trying to *encourage. Just because you don't like my position doesn't mean I'm trying to discourage discussion. I find it amazing that so many people here have tried to silence me simply because I don't agree. Nothing could be less American.

    I have an even simpler math formula for you. If government interference is removed from the system all together, we'll be paying doctors directly. competition will again drive costs down and bad doctors will go out of business. There won't be any form of middle man to pay, period. Even under MFA there's a middle man. It's the government. Our government is famous for its inefficiencies... inefficiencies that will cost us more money for health in the long run.

    Young people are losing confidence that there will be any social security left for them when they reach retirement, and rightfully so.

    http://www.emaxhealth.com/49/5819.html

    I believe the same will hold true for MFA ... and especially true for the current system. You're asking for we young-uns to pay for your medical bills with no real guarantee that we'll have anything left to help us when we reach your age.

    There are already whistle blower laws in place. You see how well those have worked so far. I've already posted links to FDA and Medicare officials moving back and fourth between those offices and private drug companies.

    Sorry if my trust in the government isn't as high as yours, but I'm basing my position on verifiable facts from history... not some made up numbers from a group with an agenda.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 11, 2010 @ 08:22AM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      "Curtis, as much a I don't like the MFA being discussed here"

      You are not dealing with an old fool here Mark, so don't try to play your little word games with me. Go play with Bob ,or yourself perhaps. I've heard everyone of those "Talking Points" so many times, that I have them memorized.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 11, 2010 @ 09:04AM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      First Posted: 03-10-10 03:00 PM   |   Updated: 03-10-10 04:25 PM

       

      Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) became the 41st senator to say that he would back the public insurance option as part of a health care bill moved through reconciliation.

      Nelson, asked by HuffPost if he would vote for a public option on the Senate floor, was unequivocal. "Yes," he said firmly. "I've already voted for it in the committee, in the Finance Committee."

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 11, 2010 @ 11:23AM PT
      Mark R

      "You are not dealing with an old fool here..."

      I never said I was, Curtis. You seem like an intelligent person. If that's the case, why can't we get an intelligent dialog going on this? Seems like rather than starting a discussion, everyone here just wants to call me names or belittle my position.

      I'm not a radio talk show host. I don't have "talking points." I have legit concerns about the idea of spreading our current medicare system to every American, which is what you posted about. It has already been proven that the current system is corrupt and full of holes. Current estimates put medicare being insolvent in 7 to 9 years. Have you even looked in to how much the average family would have to pay into the current medicare system in order to cover every family AND keep it running properly? If so, where are the numbers? I'd like to look at them.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 11, 2010 @ 04:29PM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      OK Mark, It's painfully obvious that you can't ,(or won't )take a hint, so let me just put it to you straight. You know what I think and support and I know enough about the myriad of idea's that you are espousing to know that we disagree. We have nothing to debate or enter into a "Dialog about, because you are NOT going to change my mind and even if I thiught I could change your mind, I don't have the time or patience to make the attempt. Therefore, this is the end of our communication. You can continue your verbal Banter for as long as you like, but this is my last response.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Hal Goldfarb
      Apr 04, 2010 @ 12:02AM PT
      Hal Goldfarb

      Make that two of us, Curtis.  I deleted one thread I started, and I may delete some others.

      Like you, I am tired of listening to corporate me-me-me mentality.  We can proceed to debate the issues relevant to improving health care.  Disproving the theory of free markets is for a different forum, and I for one, am going to leave that discussion to that other forum.

      (Earplugs inserted ...)

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Linda Olson
    Mar 11, 2010 @ 12:23PM PT
    Linda Olson

    Please Sign Alan Grayson's Medicare buy-in amendment
    www.WeWantMedicare.com. It's deficit neutral because you pay for it,
    same as you pay your premiums every month now:
    http://salsa.mydccc.org/o/30019/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=17.
    Please pass to all your friends and all your groups!

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 11, 2010 @ 04:34PM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      Thanks for the support Linda, Alan is my Congressman from the eighth district of Florida, needless to say I am proud of him and call regularly to tell him, or a member of his Staff so..........

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Hal Goldfarb
      Apr 03, 2010 @ 11:47PM PT
      Hal Goldfarb

      While Grayson's approach is tempting even to me, I can't support this because it will not be revenue-neutral.  It will be adding more sick people to the program, assuming that most healthy people still on insurance will stay with their private coverage.  This puts strain on the revenue stream, unless you are OK with compromising the outcomes of the entire system.

      This will, in turn, encourage health insurers to cherry-pick even more than they already do (the legislation does not compel insurers to keep unprofitable patients enrolled).   Meanwhile, Medicare will be saddled with an increasingly disproportional number of sick and unhealthy people.

      Part of the problem, too, is that once "they have theirs," they might feel less concerned about pursuing Single Payer.

      Again, it is tempting to grab this low-hanging fruit. I agree it won't be the disaster of Obama's system, but it will still be a huge risk.   I cannot support this.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • pamella gronemeyer
    Mar 11, 2010 @ 02:15PM PT
    pamella gronemeyer

    Medicare is the public option that works. Money needs to be spent for healthcare not to subsidize the insurance industry. We derive no benefit from the middlemen of the insurance industry. This will require a change in American thinking. However, why  is healthcare treated as a commodity rather than a human right? We must do better. Medicare fro ALL!

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • B. Spoon
      Mar 12, 2010 @ 06:35AM PT
      B. Spoon

      Medicare spends roughly $8000 per person per year because it takes care of our oldest and sickest plus most end-of-life care where a very high percentage of lifetime medical expenses are incurred.  We also spend roughly $8000 per person on our youngest and healthiest ($2.4 trillion divided by 300 million people).  The $8000 cost per person for our youngest and healthiest would go WAY down if everyone were covered under Medicare, with the collective savings estimated at $400 Billion per year.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Terry Adcock
    Mar 11, 2010 @ 02:27PM PT
    Terry Adcock

    As of now, 3,184 persons have voted for the Idea of Improved Medicare for All.  Several people have posted comments about creative things they have done in support of the Idea. 

    I would like to hear from some of those who have voted, but have not posted a comment as yet.  What are you doing to support this Idea so that it is adopted as our government's policy?

     

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Terry Adcock
      Mar 11, 2010 @ 02:30PM PT
      Terry Adcock

      That number is now 3,234.  Please join us in voting!

       

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Lynn Huidekoper, RN
      Mar 11, 2010 @ 09:06PM PT
      Lynn Huidekoper, RN

      Terry,

      I am a member of Health Care for All-California which wrote the California Single Payer legislation, SB810. It has been vetoed twice by our Republican Gov. Schwarzenegger. It will go to his desk a 3rd time this year knowing he will again veto it. However, we SP folks are undaunted. We will eventually win the health care system every other industrialized country enjoys and which 60% MD's and folks in the US want.

      I have also been active in trying to pass HR676 on the national level. We had a large SP Rally in Wash, DC on July 30 that I participated in. I have worked as an RN for 40 years so am intimately involved with our broken system. I am also one of the 25 million under-insured due to pre-existing conditions. I currently owe more thatn $15,000 in health care and dental bills. The health care bills are for tests.only(blood tests, CT scans,etc.) One crucial reform is to get doctors and hospitals to stop charging whatever they want. It's ludicrous what they charge for simple blood tests and they get away with it.

      Thia has to stop. Kaiser is the only system which has tried to keep costs down while delivering decent health care. They should be the model for Single Payer when we get it.

      Yesterday I signed Cong. Alan Grayson's Medicare for All proposal to go to Nancy Pelosi.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Lynn Huidekoper, RN
      Mar 11, 2010 @ 09:06PM PT
      Lynn Huidekoper, RN

      Terry,

      I am a member of Health Care for All-California which wrote the California Single Payer legislation, SB810. It has been vetoed twice by our Republican Gov. Schwarzenegger. It will go to his desk a 3rd time this year knowing he will again veto it. However, we SP folks are undaunted. We will eventually win the health care system every other industrialized country enjoys and which 60% MD's and folks in the US want.

      I have also been active in trying to pass HR676 on the national level. We had a large SP Rally in Wash, DC on July 30 that I participated in. I have worked as an RN for 40 years so am intimately involved with our broken system. I am also one of the 25 million under-insured due to pre-existing conditions. I currently owe more thatn $15,000 in health care and dental bills. The health care bills are for tests.only(blood tests, CT scans,etc.) One crucial reform is to get doctors and hospitals to stop charging whatever they want. It's ludicrous what they charge for simple blood tests and they get away with it.

      Thia has to stop. Kaiser is the only system which has tried to keep costs down while delivering decent health care. They should be the model for Single Payer when we get it.

      Yesterday I signed Cong. Alan Grayson's Medicare for All proposal to go to Nancy Pelosi.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Alfred Borg
    Mar 11, 2010 @ 03:36PM PT
    Alfred Borg

    Keep these debates un-personal, we are all entitled to our opion even if it is wrong. :-)

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Lincoln Justice
    Mar 11, 2010 @ 03:42PM PT
    Lincoln Justice

    Expanded Medicare for everyone is the only cost effective solution to the health insurance mess we are in.   It is time to get the private insurance companies off our backs and use the savings to insuring everyone.   This would reduce the cost of health care by over $400 billion per year and reduce insurance premiums for almost everyone.  

    We should not settle for any government plan that does not include at lease a public option that is open to every person in the USA.  

    All congress need to do is open Medicare to everyone under 65.   No new government health insurance structure needs to be created.   Just open the door and allow people to apply.   Problem solved.  

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Mark R
      Mar 12, 2010 @ 07:31AM PT
      Mark R

      Bob the Health Care Advocate has already posted above why we don't want to expand the current medicare system.  See the post that begins with "Medicare as we know it would NOT be a good plan for all."

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Glen Sandberg
    Mar 11, 2010 @ 05:05PM PT
    Glen Sandberg

    We must wean ourselves away from the private-profit-at-any-price propaganda and recognize the value of public services like education and health care.  Since Ben Franklin we don't expect the owner whose house is on fire to pay for the fire brigade, likewise people disabled by sickness should not have to pay to get well.  Those are services we all might need, well equipped as only a public service can be.

    Likewise Social Security and Medicare are entitlements that we have paid for during our working career, entrusted to public, non-profit agencies because businesses for profit can't resist skimming whatever they can get away with.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Dale Sklar
    Mar 11, 2010 @ 09:52PM PT
    Dale Sklar

    Medicare for all would also broaden the base, with younger people paying into the program & needing less medical care.  Their premiums would still be less than they are now with private insurance.  It's a win/win situation for all.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • B. Spoon
      Mar 12, 2010 @ 06:40AM PT
      B. Spoon

      Obama KNOWS this yet refuses to support the concept.  The only reason I can think of why he won't is because he has sold out the Good of the Whole for the Corporate Welfare of the Few (which includes his own political campaign fund).

      McCain didn't have a clue, but Obama knows what needs to be done and refuses to do it. 

      Which is worse?

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Mar 12, 2010 @ 03:45AM PT
    Liberal Democratic Party Of The United States

    Help me change America on health care  

    Please post this on your blog and spread it around also to your members.


    Send the following email to Republican and conservative contributor Rite Aid Pharmacies at

    contacttheboard@riteaid.com

    Send me a bcc copy to info@democratz.org when you send this email. SPREAD the word.


    To the Rite Aid CEO:

    I join with many other people who demand that you get congress and the President to enact a single payer health care plan that will work like HR676 but will not ban private insurance. Your company PAC has given money to conservatives over the years.

    This public option will get fully funded by US government general federal taxes.

    People will have no monthly premiums, no copays, no yearly deductibles, no coverage gaps, no means tests and no yearly or lifetime caps for coverage.

    This public option will cover 100 percent of the cost of: all doctor's visits including dental visits, all generic and patented medications, surgery and all hospital visits, hospice and nursing home residence and abortion, contraception and other family planning costs.

    People can choose this single payer public option health care plan at will even if they had or have private plans presently.

    People will have the option to choose private plans or keep the private plans that they have now.

    This legislation should appear implemented as amendments to HR676

    Until this legislation gets enacted into law, I REFUSE to do business with Rite Aid Pharmacies

    Do as I demand, or you will lose my business and the business and income from many other people as myself.

    Good day.





    Help stop the filibuster. Brown Forman, Republican and conservative contributor who distributes Jack Daniels whiskey and Southern Comfort operates out of Kentucky, Senate Minority leader Senator Mitch McConnell's state. SPREAD the word.


    Send me a bcc copy to info@democratz.org when you send this email.


    Email Brown Forman at Brown-Forman@b-f.com



    To the Brown Forman CEO:

    Your company PAC has given money to Sen. Mitch McConnell in the past.  I will not buy Jack Daniels Whiskey and Southern Comfort until you convince Mitch McConnell to stop all filibusters on legislation and holds on appointments for the duration of the Obama administration.

    Good Day.




    You can see further efforts at http://www.democratz.org

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Steven Manning
    Mar 12, 2010 @ 05:01AM PT
    Steven Manning

     

    I'm sure the insurance honchos are busy thinking up new and exciting ways to "age" our quest for medicare for all. 

    The problem is: They're extraordinarily adept at slinging monkey poop.

    What they throw is so repulsive and blinding that many of us get caught up in the confusion and subterfuge.Which is exactly what they want

    They've been ruining American lives for decades.

    It's time. It's time to ram a "single payer" medicare for all  bill down their monkey throats! 

    70 people died yesterday because of the existing system!

    Say NO to monkey care! Say YES to single payer medicare!

    Please call your representative now.

     

     

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Lauren Serven
    Mar 12, 2010 @ 05:34AM PT
    Lauren Serven

    A Medicare Buy In is the sanest way to provide a public alternative to private insurance. Let's not lose sight of the forest because of the tees folks. If we are MANDATED to buy insurance there are those of us who will have philosophical arguments for not wanting to participate in private, shareholder profit based insurance. To tell you the truth, I wouldn't care if the Medicarew payments were higher than the private coverage, I still would take the buy in because at least my premium costs would go toward helping achieve coverage for Americans rather than profits for shareholders.

     

    Is Medicare riddled with problems? Sure, it probably is AND WE CAN FIX THAT. We have little power as citizens to affect changes in a PRIVATE corporation. 

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Mark R
      Mar 12, 2010 @ 07:23AM PT
      Mark R

      Are you serious? Changing the behavior of private corporations is EXACTLY what the free market does. The problem we have with private insurance companies is the near monopolies our government has created. Don't think, for one second, that the major insurance companies want the fed gov to open up sales across state lines.

      Of course, as I've said before, I'd like to see insurance out of the picture for everything except major medical. Make doctors earn their pay based on competition. The good ones will rise to the top and the bad ones will find new lines of work. Capitalism is what built this country. The further we get from it, the worse off we are.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Papa Groove
      Mar 12, 2010 @ 08:46AM PT
      Papa Groove

      Mark, that's delusional.

      First, Capitalism didn't build this country. We the people did.  Capitalism is actually the cause of almost ALL of our problems, from ignorance, to healthcare to transportation to food. Social Services exist because we realized a long time ago that Capitalism doesn't care about the people, only the profit. We instituted government regulations because capitalism wasn't working, it cannot work. It only allows a few to control the many and our country was founded on equality, not control over others.  

      2nd, The free-market doesn't exist and nor would you want it to. A free-market and a government cannot exist in the same space.  They are contradictory terms.  A true free-market would make you a slave to who ever owned the town/company/store/house you lived and worked in.  You would have almost no rights, because the market dictates that profit has the rights.  That he who owns all the resources owns all the people.

      Competition is a HORRIBLE way to do healthcare.  That's basically telling "we the people" to play Russian Roulette with our lives.  "Did i get the good doctor today?"  Doctors should be sharing everything. Medical Data and knowledge should be open and free to anybody who needs it.

      Seriously Mark, you need to wake and see the light here. There is no future with Capitalism.  

      This planet is of limited resources, capitalism is about exploiting every resources for personal gain. It doesn't care about the environment, it doesn't care about healthcare, it doesn't care about people. It only cares about making sure 1 person can take more than another person.

      You wouldn't treat your own kids this way, stop treating others like this.  ie, do you make your 7 year old kid get a job and pay for his food, healthcare, education (social services).  Do you teach your kids to share or take from each other? (make profit)

      Mark, you need to evolve.  Your idea are very shortsighted and most have been debunked over and over. As you stated earlier:

      "Changing the behavior of private corporations is EXACTLY what the free market does."

      But what you don't get is that it doesn't change for the betterment of people, it changes for the betterment of profit.  Which is why Ho-Hos and twinkies still exist.

      Healthcare and social services need to be void of profit cause if they fail, WE as a people no longer exist. Life fails.

       

       

       

       

       

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 15, 2010 @ 05:45PM PT
      Mark R

      "Competition is a HORRIBLE way to do healthcare."

      For innovation and weeding out the bad doctors, competition is the BEST system available. You find a doctor you like either by word of mouth or by experience. If you have to go to the emergency room, you're less likely to be assigned a bad doctor because they've all been put out of business. Insurance keeps bad doctors around.

      "There is no future with Capitalism."

      OMG! I don't know whether to laugh or cry. You seem to have no concept of what real capitalism is. You seem to think that America's health care system is currently based on it, which is entirely wrong. I don't even know how to reply to this.

      "This planet is of limited resources, capitalism is about exploiting every resources for personal gain."

      No, IT'S NOT! I'll give you a perfect example. Raw milk is a heavily governed commodity, making it difficult for those of us who want to buy it to do so. There is a growing community of people like me who have educated ourselves on the safety and health benefits of raw milk, and we would ONLY buy it from farms that practice sustainable farming. There would be NO MARKET for factory farmed raw milk. However, the government, in all its omnipotence, thinks it knows more bout my health than me, so I have to buy my milk from an "underground supplier." It's just one of many cases where government involvement hampers the benefits capitalism would bring to our society.

      Continued below...

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 15, 2010 @ 05:57PM PT
      Mark R

      "[capitalism] only cares about making sure 1 person can take more than another person."

      Absolutely wrong. In a true capitalist society, if one person is making too much money, others flock to that profession or service and start competing with the first person. I'm in I.T. and have seen the market fluctuations in my field MANY times during my tenure. Capitalism is exactly why you can buy 10 times the computer you could 5 years ago for 1/10th the price. Capitalism is why we've seen constant drops in prices for cell phones and other electronic goods. Electronics is one of the least regulated industries in America, and that's specifically why it does so well. If every other industry had that luxury, cars would cost $500 these days and our economy would actually see DEFLATION instead of inflation. Read the book "Rich Dad, Poor Dad."

      Speak of books, another I'd recommend is "More Liberty Means Less Government" by Walter E. Williams.

      "Mark, you need to evolve."

      Your steps towards communism is not evolving. As Frank Zappa said, "Communism doesn't work because people like to own stuff."

      "But what you don't get is that it doesn't change for the betterment of people"

      It absolutely DOES... when it's capitalism and not corporatism. Your entire argument is based on corporatism, which I loath. I think you need to study up on the difference before we continue this discussion. Your views on capitalism aren't supported by any example I can think of.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Margaret Richards
    Mar 12, 2010 @ 05:37AM PT
    Margaret Richards

    I'd like to vote on this but your web site is a witch to sign into.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Curtis Mulkey
    Mar 12, 2010 @ 08:00AM PT
    Curtis Mulkey

    I found this interesting and relivant.

      "100 Percent of Primary Care Doctors in Denmark Use Electronic Medical Records, Study FindsAll primary care doctors in Denmark use electronic medical records and 98 percent have the ability to electronically manage patient care—including ordering prescriptions, drafting notes about patient visits, and sending appointment reminders. In addition, almost all medical communication between primary care doctors, specialists, and hospitals is electronic, according to a new Commonwealth Fund profile of the Danish health care system."

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Bob Haiducek
    Mar 12, 2010 @ 11:30AM PT
    Bob Haiducek

    It's about over for an Imrproved Medicare for All, unless the pace picks up for having additional persons vote for this topic. As of 1:30 p.m. this idea was in 11th place ... not in the top ten.

    I believe that this idea could be in the top ten by 5:00 p.m. EST .... 2:00 p.m. PST. But it will take some final round of people getting more people to vote during that three hours. I've let people know who could have ... and perhaps did or will ... send out notices to thousands or tens of thousands of people. We'll see what happens. For every hour that passed today the "rare diseases" people increased by over 1.5 votes for every 1 Improved for Medicare for All vote. So the pace of voting is going to have to increase dramatically.

    - Bob

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Rose Voisk
    Mar 12, 2010 @ 12:51PM PT
    Rose Voisk

    Single payer or medicare for all is the only right/just way.  The health insurance should have never been a for-profit company/institution.  Noone should have ever profited a penny on acc ount of our health care, insurance and/or prescription drugs.  

    All the other civilized nations have had for a long time universal health care that costs them incomparably less than the American injust health care system. 

    Rose Voisk

     

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Marcia Everett
    Mar 15, 2010 @ 08:12PM PT
    Marcia Everett

    Listening to Mark. I don't think I would want to go back to living in the days before any government protections. Does bureacracy mess up, sure but that's still better than no protection. I dont't want to work 16 hour days (although with two jobs I do anyway) I don't want to be put out of work after a tractor falls on my head, without any compensation. I don't want to be limited in my oportunity for changing my class because of the amount it would cost to pay for my education. I don't want to drink poisoned water because a nuclear plant is leaking. I need someone to be about the job of making sure people  (BUSINESS PEOPLE in search of the HIGHEST PROFIT/CAPIATAL GAIN) don't CHEAT! I only needed to read a few instances of strikers from the late 1800's early 1900's to make up my mind. I only needed to read a few pages of Eduardo Galleano describeing the many minerals ripped from South America, leaving those countries shells  with no substance, to know where I stand.

     

    Somewhere a long time ago two cavepeople had to decide you stay and watch while I go and hunt, or you come hunt with me  and hep surround the prey, or let's live over there insread of over here.  ALL of THAT is GOVERNANCE. We are people there is no avoiding government. 

     

    We want the GOVERNMENT to collect the taxes and pay the bills.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 06:49AM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      Marcia, I just wanted to thank you for all the links below and totally agree with this Post. I run into "Mark's type" on a regular basis and have learned that you simply have to ignore them. They are totally "Brain-washed" and convienced that "Their way" is the "Only way". Documented Facts, mean nothing to them, unless these facts agree with their pre-conceived conclusions. Their joy in life is finding someone who will argue with them, because when one is intellectually blind to anything other than what they believe,( in their minds), they can't loose and "WINNING" is the end all to be all to them.........

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 09:56AM PT
      Mark R

      Well, Marcia, let's talk about some of those items.

      You say you don't want to work 16 hour days, but then A) admit you do and B) talk about strikes. So, how has the government protected you? If you're having to work 16 hours a day to make ends meet, wouldn't it be more convenient to work just 1 job? The strikes are another example of the free market at work. People stood up for themselves and told their companies "We're not going to take this any more." Unions weren't originally tied to the government the way they are now. They were just people coming together to make lives better for themselves.

      If a tractor falls on your head, there are laws that allow you to sue the person or entity responsible. I never said I want NO government. Laws are there for a reason. Now, if YOU'RE responsible from dropping a tractor on your head, well then that's your problem.

      Regarding education... what we need is MORE competition. Why don't we have school vouchers so WE can choose what kind of education our children receive? Why do we have to move to an entirely different school district to get our children a better public education? Why can't we use our taxes to pay for private schools? I believe if we did that, we'd see less emphasis on grandiose stadiums and sports programs and more on a real education.

      Continued below...

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 09:57AM PT
      Mark R

      No government entity should have the job of making sure businesses don't cheat. History shows that the government is pretty lousy at catching cheaters. Look at Charles Ponzi and Bernie Madoff. How long did they go before getting caught? If government regulations hadn't been in the way, more people would have been able to demand o know where their money was going and they likely would have been caught sooner, or not made much money at all.

      Besides, businesses who cheat are usually found out. Sharper Image made claims about their ionic breeze that weren't true. They went out of business. Enron screwed a bunch of people, they had to file bankruptcy. Atkins was doing VERY well until Dr. Atkins died and the remaining board members took the company in a direction that was profit motivated rather than health oriented. PanAm went belly up after deregulation because they couldn't (wouldn't) compete.

      I don't understand why so many people here think that they have no say in the market place. 6 months ago I wrote Heinz to ask them if they had a ketchup that didn't contain high fructose corn syrup. They sent me a form letter telling me to go to a corn refiner's web site to read why HFCS was OK. I wrote them back telling them that until they made a ketchup without HFCS, I'd be buying another brand. 2 months later, they introduced their Organic ketchup line, with NO HFCS. Now, I'm sure I wasn't the only person writing. The point is, the customer, the market, made the demand and the supplier responded. The ketchup costs 30 cents more than the one containing HFCS, and I'm happy to pay it.

      Free market is all about public education. The problem is, the government has gotten in the way of that education. There is a law (I've posted it here already) that states that no one can advertise that food can cure or prevent disease. There are dozens, if not hundreds of examples of government interference like this. Yes, we need some laws, but for the most part, when the market allows consumers to vote for the best products with their buying dollars, the junk goes away and the public is left with the good stuff.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 10:09AM PT
      Mark R

      Curtis, you can keep following me around the board making false claims about me all you want. It actually helps my position because anyone can read what I've written here and know that you're wrong. Argumentum ad hominem and straw man are the 2 weakest logical fallacies in debate.

      http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html

      My position is based on data I've presented and my arguments are based on my reading of data presented to me from others here. From my point of view, my arguments have been the most honest of any here. I have no need to stoop to name calling or straw man because I know I have a solid position. If you had the same, you'd have no reason to post your above response.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Marcia Everett
    Mar 15, 2010 @ 08:46PM PT
    Marcia Everett

    Dennis Kucinich's petition
    http://healthcare.kucinich.us/petition/

    Alan Grayson's bill
    http://salsa.mydccc.org/o/30019/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=17

    Watch the Introduction
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wy2Y5Uevisk

    Watch the explanation of the Bad Obama bill
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfuFVm6QdPU

    WHITE RIBBON MARCH
    http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=349518434484&ref=mf

    WINDOW TREATMENT
    http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=293263660251&index=1

    Send postcards to Pelosi to support either of these two bills                     http://apps.facebook.com/causes/275609?m=3f1cca43

    Watch T.R.Reid                                                                                 
    http://fora.tv/2009/09/14/TR_Reid_The_Healing_of_America

    Republicans for Single Payer
    http://www.republicansforsinglepayer.org/?p=3 

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • B. Spoon
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 07:59AM PT
      B. Spoon

      Thanks for the great post, Marcia.

      I agree the Marks of the world don't let facts interfere with their beliefs.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 09:30AM PT
      Mark R

      And where are these "facts" Spoon? I've read ever link presented to me so far and have replied appropriately. Rather than actually engaging me in a conversation of those "facts" people here would rather continue calling me names, talking about me instead of talking to me, or just ignoring me all together.

      I've also posted numerous links in support of my position. The vast majority of them were deleted, probably because people here keep clicking on the "report" link below my posts simply because they don't like what I have to say. In other words, the only way you can win the debate is to silence my position.

      Doesn't seem like a very convincing position to me.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • B. Spoon
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 09:49AM PT
      B. Spoon

      Look around you for the facts.  I like PNHP as well as the National and California Nurses' Associations, but you choose to not believe what they say.  Is that because you believe nurses couldn't possibly know anything that's true about health care?  Plenty of us have tried to engage you but you remain steadfastly disengaged and unengagable, which is why we refuse to waste any more time in discussion (because you simply won't listen).  YOU are the one who chooses to ignore everything WE say.  Why keep talking to someone who has no ears?

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 10:26AM PT
      Mark R

      Looking around me for the facts is exactly what I've done... and then presented those facts here. Just to make sure I didn't somehow miss something you had said (as I said, I will ONLY honestly debate) I just went through every one of your posts on this screen.  There was not one single link in any of them. Only your opinions... which you are entitled to, of course, but your opinions hold no merit with me.

      Add that to the fact that most here keep using straw man and name calling tactics against me and you can understand why its easy for me to keep my position... which, by the way, is NOT to maintain the status quo. Once more, I believe insurance needs to be nothing but major medical and NOT obtained through companies. Regular doctor visits should be paid for out of pocket, which would lessen medical expenses by eliminating all middle men (including the government) and re-introduce real competition among local doctors.

      Saying that I've ignored everything you've said is just more straw man. I have addressed just about everything said to me here, many times with links showing evidence of my position. Saying I've ignored you doesn't make it true... as anyone can see by reading this page.  Disagreeing with your talking points is not the same as ignoring you.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • B. Spoon
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 11:09AM PT
      B. Spoon

      Well now that's an outright falsehood and ironically shows that you dishonestly debate. I just told you PNHP, California and National Nurses' Associations.  See?  You don't listen because you don't appear to have that ability, and you've just proven it again.  In reality (not in your mind) you have ignored most the points I've made.  You also conveniently ignore the fact that many people have chronic diseases that need chronic care.  One well-patient doctor visit per year with major medical (unless they have to go without the chronic care they need and end up in deep doo-doo because they can't afford to pay for expensive preventative treatments out-of-pocket) will not take care of their medical needs.  After their easily manageable but untreated diseases lead to easily preventable deaths and disabilities, it's too late and too bad for them.  Who pays after eyes, legs and kidneys are lost to diabetes left untreated?  Or easily preventable asthma attacks?  But for the grace of God go you, My Friend.  I think you live in PSBW (Parallel Simultaneous Backwards World) and are clearly delusional.  That's why people are ignoring you, not because you make sense but exactly the opposite.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 11:45AM PT
      Mark R

      Spoon, I've already addressed MANY of the points of PNHP here on this board. You have either not read my posts or those are some of the posts that have been removed. So, it's you who are being dishonest.

      Again, you're showing your ample lack of knowledge in the area of nutrition. The vast majority of chronic diseases have non-medical cures... and are also caused by nutritional deficiencies. You mentioned diabetes. I've personally helped many people cure their type II diabetes by changing their diets. Not control, CURE.

      Other chronic diseases I've helped people with include depression, ADD/ADHD, arthritis, hypertension, asthma, cystic fibrosis, psoriasis and, yes, even a couple of different types of cancer.

      Medical professionals will tell you that these diseases are incurable, but that's because current law doesn't acknowledge that foods / supplements can cure or prevent disease. So, what they mean is, there's no *medical* cure.

      Perhaps I *do* live in PSBW, but that's only because I've dug so long that I've finally made it to the truth while people like you are still poking around on the surface, allowing the underlying problems to control your lives.

      So, nice try on catching me in a lie... but it's not going to happen. I'm up front and honest because I'm sincere in my position.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • B. Spoon
    Mar 16, 2010 @ 07:11AM PT
    B. Spoon

    What Mark and too many others don't understand is that a BALANCED economy is FAR better than a laissez faire "free" market one run amok.  The choice of whether or not to purchase a good or service must be "free" in the first place in order for free market rules to work.  Free market rules work well a lot (but not all) of the time.  If you get sick or are in an accident, then you are in a captive market where free market rules break down and are killing, bankrupting, disabling and terrorizing tens of millions of Americans and their families, destroying lifetimes of honest, hard work.  Some goods and services simply should not be money making ventures but rather well-paid public services to protect the Good of our Whole.  Uniquely in this country we don't seem to be able to tell which is which.

    Which is more corrupt, private corporations or government?  Right now our leadership in both parties are ruling in favor of the Corporate Welfare of the Few and against the Good of our Whole, so I would say it's a tie.  It's called Fascism.  Used to be government's role was to make sure the free market did not run amok and roughshod over citizens who are unable to protect themselves.  We have never needed another FDR more than we need one now.  If we don't have leaders who will protect the lives of our people first and corporate profits second (and we don't), our national disparity and despair will continue to grow. 

    This sham health care bill that is about to pass will feed the broken part billions of dollars and thus entrench the problem even further, making it even harder if not impossible to solve.  Just ask Massachusetts.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 08:02AM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      I totally agree with you Mr. Spoon. "HEALTH INSURANCE" is an oxymoron. The sole purpose of an Insurance Company is to make a Profit. They don't give a RAT's "A." about you and the only time your "HEALTH" becomes an issue is when deciding if you are an "ASSET", or a "LIABILITY", in the former, your in, in the latter, your out. Insurance is for accidents, most Health Care is not an accident, but a condition.

      As an old Man, it troubles me to know that for the first time in our History, that I will be leaving the Country worse off than it was left to me and God help their Children,( unless we have a REVOLUTION and SOON).........

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • B. Spoon
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 08:30AM PT
      B. Spoon

      I totally agree with you too, Curtis.

      Except in most states your health "insurer" also will drop you if you're hurt seriously in an accident, OR get sick...so I wouldn't say insurance is for accidents.  In America profitable health insurance (which is the only kind available for those under age 65) is only for healthy people.  Some exceptions exist for some (not all) who work at large corporations or are government employees.  It's really whether you are an asset or a liablility, period.  Often times without your knowledge your employer will find a way to get rid of you if you become a health unsurance liability.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Curtis Mulkey
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 09:49AM PT
      Curtis Mulkey

      B. Spoon quote:"Often times without your knowledge your employer will find a way to get rid of you if you become a health unsurance liability."

         Or take out a Millionh $ Life Insurance Policy on you,( if the odds look good)........

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 16, 2010 @ 11:34AM PT
      Mark R

      "What Mark and too many others don't understand is that a BALANCED economy is FAR better than a laissez faire "free" market one run amok."

      You seem to think I'm in favor of anarchy. That's not true. I believe there are already laws in place (maybe too many) that would curtail any wrong doing by individual companies, provided there was a true free market. If a company wrongs a customer, they either have an opportunity to make it right or they can get sued. If they get sued too many times, they go out of business.

      Many here seem to think that a company can do anything they want. Papa Groove wrote "Capitalism is actually the cause of almost ALL of our problems." In a true free market, nothing can be further from the truth. Our food supply is NOT a true free market BECAUSE of government involvement. Our food supply is poisoning us and our land because subsidies make it cheaper to confine cattle to small plots of land and truck in corn rather than letting them roam around on fields of grass.

      More and more, the market is demanding sustainability. The explosive growth of stores like Whole Foods is evidence of that.  If the government would just get out of the way, the market would see to it that our population became healthier. Regulation of subsidation are just hindering progress.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Lynn Huidekoper, RN
    Mar 16, 2010 @ 09:25PM PT
    Lynn Huidekoper, RN

    Mark,

    FYI-if SB810, the California Single Payer bill, was passed with an accompanying funding bill if you are licensed in California you could be reimbursed by the system for your nutritional services.  The nurse who wrote our bill has a husband who is homeopath so she made sure that alternative treatments were covered if the pracitioner holds a valid Calif. license in that field. That includes acupuncturists, chiropracters, homeopaths,.etc.

    There is little govt. regulation of the health insurance industry. That's why we're in the mess we're in. They get huge subsidies to run their Medicare Advantage programs. There is no reason the have the health care of people traded on Wall St. like a commodity. If you truly cared about people as you claim in "curing" diseases you would support getting rid of the profit motive. Even in Switzerland they don't allow these companies to make a profit. Do you get paid for your services now and if so by whom?

    Lynn

    PS I am brave in showing my face. Are you?

     

     

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Mark R
      Mar 19, 2010 @ 10:34AM PT
      Mark R

      Lynn, you said "There is little govt. regulation of the health insurance industry. That's why we're in the mess we're in. They get huge subsidies to run their Medicare Advantage programs. There is no reason the have the health care of people traded on Wall St. like a commodity."

      If you think that this is what I'm supporting then you haven't read a single word I've written. I've already posted as clear as possible my feelings toward the current system. I'm not going to waste time doing it again.

      Posting a picture doesn't make you brave... and forcing Americans to pay for services they may or may not use doesn't make you noble.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Hal Goldfarb
      Mar 25, 2010 @ 01:16AM PT
      Hal Goldfarb

      Mark:  Have you read "The Shock Doctrine?"  I think this book sums it all up very neatly.  While you support getting government out of the way, so do many like-minded persons who kill off legitimately-elected governments, labor leaders, and community activists to make way for businesses just like yours, all over the world.

      The book is very well footnoted, so you can check the facts for yourself.  I want to believe that you would never think of hurting innocent people in your search for profits.  If so, you should really read this book.  Also, check out "Confessions of an Economic Hitman."  This is first-hand involvement with that ugly system.

      Be careful of what you support.   It may become true.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 27, 2010 @ 02:09PM PT
      Mark R

      Hal, you really have no idea where I stand, do you... The Shock Doctrine isn't about capitalism, even if it says it is.  It's about corporatism.  You REALLY need to learn the difference.  I'm firmly against corporatism and strongly FOR capitalism.  Corporatism is what's destroying our country... and it's doing it by manipulating our government. Corporate America is infiltrating and changing our laws in order to crush competition and maximize profits.

      The difference between you and me is that you'd rather make government bigger in order to handle this problem and I'd rather make government smaller.  In my opinion, it's the corporate control of government that has caused the vast majority of our nation's problems to begin with.  Eliminate those parts of the government that corporations have created and the problems correct themselves.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Marcia Everett
    Mar 20, 2010 @ 01:40PM PT
    Marcia Everett

    72 hours. 66 cosponsors in the House. 21,254 citizen cosponsors at WeWantMedicare.com.

    The Public Option Act. It's simple. It's popular. 82% of Scott Brown voters favor it. It lets anyone buy into Medicare at cost. You want it, you pay for it, and you're in.

    You know and I know that it's a winner.

    Private insurers make money denying us the care we need, when we need it most. Medicare doesn't. So we want Medicare. And we want it now.

    Ask your Member of Congress to stand up for us. Call your member of Congress now, and ask him or her to cosponsor HR 4789, the Public Option Act.

    Call the switchboard: (202) 224-3121

    After you call, please let me know how it went. I need to know if your Representative is with us or against us. Tell me how it goes.

    This is the week to act. We are likely to vote on a healthcare bill without a public option. We should get a vote on the Public Option Act as well. The four-page bill opens Medicare to all. It's that simple.

    Call your member of Congress now, and ask if he or she has the guts to stand up for you.

    Call the switchboard: (202) 224-3121

    Courage,

    Alan

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Marcia Everett
    Mar 23, 2010 @ 02:11PM PT
    Marcia Everett

    My working 16 hours on some days doesn't prove that the government didn't protect me years ago with an 8 hour day law. It just shows that capitalists have found their way around that law by hiring people to work at the lowest wages they possibly can, forcing people to have to get second jobs.

     

    If something falls on me while I'm working, I shouldn't have to sue the employer. If I have helped the employer make millions up to this point selling lets say-plane parts, I should not be thrown out the door to rot away in my hovel, while the employer puts someone in my place. (That doesn't mean I expect my place to be held indefinitely) It means that with free market capitalist there is often no value to what the WORKER provides.

    It's as if an owner thinks he can sell a billion planes all by himself. No you can't, you need hundreds of workers.  This system is adversarial. What is good for the employer is not entirely good for the employee.

    Healthcare should not be a part of this system. Middle men always raise the price of something. Insurance companies are middlemen, more like mobsters if you ask me but whatever.

    If people who believe the way you do want to have free market, FIRST pay for all of the things you've already taken.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Mark R
      Mar 24, 2010 @ 04:13PM PT
      Mark R

      Marcia, here's the deal. If our government were well run, low paying jobs would be sufficient for living in our country because the prices of goods and services would continuously go down, not up.  There would be no inflation.  As I've already said, electronics are the perfect example of this.  Innovation drives a good economy.  Government gets in the way.

      Perhaps you'd like to tell me what it is, exactly, that I've taken that I should be paying for?  I can tell you that, as a business owner, the government nor anyone else ever gave me anything.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Hal Goldfarb
      Mar 25, 2010 @ 01:57AM PT
      Hal Goldfarb

      So, then how cmoe our food prices keep going up?  I am paying about 25% more for food now than I was about 2 years ago.  And that includes produce as well as staple goods.  I believe that I am like most people.  I eat.  Food is a necessity, not a luxury.  Especially what I eat!  Government got out of the way and does not regulate the giant food producers, processors, distributors, or even the retail supermarket chains.  But prices go up?  And one might argue the quality has been going down, with more and more food scares every year.

      Why is it that our privatized transit system here in Phoenix had a 20% fare hike a year ago, and now they are looking at reducing some train service?  Government got out of the way and let the private profiteers run the buses and trains, but the prices keep going up, and the service keeps going down?  That doesn't happen in Portland OR to this extent; they have a publicly-run system (by and large).

      Our electric utility is run by large, wealthy land owners, even though it is supposedly a public utility.  Yet they are talking about price hikes.  Government got out of the way, but prices go up?

      The automakers, especially under the Bush administration, went largely unregulated.  These facts are now coming to surface, not just with the Toyota recalls, but with entire supply chains involved.  Have car prices gone down?  Sure, when their inventories got so out of hand they finally cut prices.  Why hasn't the auto industry produced a safe and high-mileage vehicle for less money each model year?  Government got out of the way, yet prices did not go down, at least not on the scale you mention with respect to microprocessors and memory chips.

      And have any idea WHY memory chips have fallen in price over the long term?  Part of it is better technology.  But just as much of it is the increasing employment of underpaid workers in countries that have no wage or labor laws (or many other laws, for that matter).  I appreciate lower prices, but not at the cost of human suffering.

      I am not convinced that free markets and capitalism produce nirvana, particularly without government regulation.

       

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 25, 2010 @ 12:36PM PT
      Mark R

       

      Hal, you couldn't be more wrong about the food supply and government.  As I've said a dozen times here at least, our government is heavily involved in our food supply. We spend $10B to $18B a year to subsidize junk food crops like corn, soy and even tobacco.  We expend HUGE amounts of effort to tax imports on foods simply because that's what food lobbists want.  They don't like the competition the global economy gives us.

      So, with only those 2 example, you can blame higher food prices on A) food subsidies that create a falsely deflated market for junk food and, at the same time, pull farmers away from producing healthy food so they can collect the easy cash on junk food crops.  B) elevated prices due to taxes on imports, raising the cost to us for those imported goods and allowing American farmers to charge more for theirs.

      In case you haven't noticed, the price of junk food is significantly less now that it was 20 years ago. That's BECAUSE of those subsidies. America is one of the only nations where the poorest in the country are also the fattest, on average.  In most countries, obesity is a problem of the rich.

      Don't, for one second, think that ANY utility isn't at least partially government controlled. Utilities fall into a slightly different category than most goods and services, which is why they were so heavily regulated in the first place. Most utilities are known as "Necessary monopolies" or "Natural monopolies."  I suggest you read up on those terms.

      Government hasn't even come close to getting out of the way of the auto makers. Research the term "Corporate Average Fuel Economy." In the last 30 years, though, vehicle fuel efficiency averages across the board are better now then they were back then.

      http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_04_23.html

      So, auto makers ARE producing vehicles that get better and better mileage. Government, by no stretch of the imagination, got out of the way. Were car makers allowed to produce cars without seat belts again? What about no airbags? You say government got out of the way, but I don't see it.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 25, 2010 @ 12:36PM PT
      Mark R

      Regarding the cost of memory chips, you're way off base.  There's actually VERY little human interaction in the process of making memory.  It's an almost 100% automated process done by machines.  Most memory doesn't even see a human until it's ready to be shipped.

      http://www.ehow.com/how-does_5318307_computer-memory-made.html

      It's innovation that drives the free market, and government that gets in the way.

      All of this completely ignores where government has the biggest stronghold... our money supply. The fed "controls inflation" with artificial means of adjusting interest rates. In the days before the fed, inflation was practically unheard of. It's the fed screwing with our money supply, making loans for far less than a free market would make, encouraging borrowing and discouraging saving, that is the driving force behind our economy's inflation.

      Take a look here at inflation factors:

      http://oregonstate.edu/cla/polisci/sites/default/files/faculty-research/sahr/inflation-conversion/pdf/infcf17742008.pdf

      and then notice what happened in 1913 (when the Fed was given control of our money.) Since the Fed took control, our dollar has depreciated over 94%.  Inflation was practically unheard of before then. That's what happens when you give government control of things they have no business controlling.

       

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Lynn Huidekoper, RN
    Mar 25, 2010 @ 03:06AM PT
    Lynn Huidekoper, RN

    Hal,

    You and I can disagree about words. However, I have been a nurse for 40 years and care for all ages having surgery. The term "elective" is usually for any operation the pt. elects to have and  it's not life or death situation. So in the field we call a knee replacement elective when the pt. elects to have it. Pts. may "elect" not to have their knee replaced for a variety of reasons. My mother "elected" to have her sugery when she wanted it awhile after being told it was recommended. Again, elective surgery is usually surgery that is not urgent. In Canada, I have heard that there are sometimes waits for "elective" surgery but not for urgent surgery.

    For any surgery, emergency or not, the pt. has to write a written "consent" for the procedure unless they are in a life or death situation and unable to sign the consent. Hospitals have a policy of who can give consent to save a life.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Lynn Huidekoper, RN
    Mar 25, 2010 @ 03:12AM PT
    Lynn Huidekoper, RN

    I Googled and found these 2 definitions:

    Elective surgery: Surgery that is subject to choice (election). The choice may be made by the patient or doctor.

    For example, the time when a surgical procedure is performed may be elective. The procedure is beneficial to the patient but does not need be done at a particular time.

    As opposed to urgent or emergency surgery.

    Wikipedia:

    Elective surgery is surgery that is not urgently required due to an emergency. Elective surgery may be performed for medical purposes, such as cataract surgery, or for other work such as breast implants. These are procedures that the person who wants it decides to undertake, and which may be helpful, but are not necessarily essential.

    However, the term is not without definition problems. Some countries or health systems for example consider hip replacements as elective surgery, because a bad hip is not life-threatening, even though it may effectively cripple the patient.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • B. Spoon
      Mar 25, 2010 @ 06:48AM PT
      B. Spoon

      I'm putting this comment here because the site won't let me post it otherwise.

      What got us into the mess we're in NOW is government refusing to take responsibility and rein in a free market that has run amok and rough-shod over our people.  Mark wants more of that laissez faire attitude (that has proven itself to be a miserable failure), and we want responsible government restoring balance, for a REAL change.  BTW, Obama and his corporatist Democrats are what the Republicans used to be, while Republicans have moved so far to the right that they're off the charts.  There is barely any Left left.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Mark R
      Mar 25, 2010 @ 12:43PM PT
      Mark R

      B. Spoon, you can't just make a broad statement like that and not support it.  What, specifically, has the government refused to take responsibility for?  I suggest you read my reply to Hal just 5 posts above.  I'm going to have to disagree with you that government hasn't intervened enough.  Read the book "More Liberty Means Less Government" to begin understanding how government involvement is hurting our country.

      Huge corporations are using our government to eliminate competition, and thus, the free market. You seem to think that we have a free market now, but nothing could be further from the truth. We don't need more government involvement, we need MUCH less, so that the playing field is again level and competition can bring our country back to being the # 1 innovator in the world.  America has become a country of spenders and lost our ability to be producers.  See my post above and get your head wrapped around what inflation is doing to our country.  If it weren't for inflation, jobs wouldn't be leaving our country by the thousands.  Inflation is caused by a poorly run government and monetary system.  Thinking that we need more government to get the mess cleaned up is like thinking we need more criminals so we can reduce crime.  It doesn't make sense.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Hal Goldfarb
    Mar 28, 2010 @ 02:18PM PT
    Hal Goldfarb

    Mark R. 

    You are a true Economic Hit Man.  Tell me why John Perkins is all wrong, despite having come clean about his involvement in the mess the West and especially the US created in its never-ending war for imperialism.  His job was to do exactly what you are talking about -- getting government out of the way.  Another good source is Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine."  She explicitly runs down too many examples of how your system destroyed one indiginous culture after another by the disciples of your heros of economic "freedom."  BTW, both books are well documented, with footnotes to check their sources.

    I'm not going to debate you on every point.  As to food though, as well as gas prices, and many other items, prices are set not by supply and demand in the retail market, and not by supply inputs in themanufacturing process.  Most prices are a reflectionn of these goods on commodities markets.  This is why we can see wild swings in gas prices at the pump even though no real world event has necessarily occured to justify them.  Usually, it is political intrigues and market manipulators, largely due to ... government getting out of the way.

    Speaking of putting words in anyone's mouth, I never (and I have never heard such an utterance) declared that bigger government leads to nirvana.  I don't know how you came to that conclusion, other than the false dichotomy argument of "everyone is against me, so they must think the opposite of what I do."  I have spent a lot of time around people on the Left and I do not recall even once someone suggesting bigger government.  I think we liked it just the way it was, thank you, big enough to provide services to working class people, the elderly and retired, the sick, and children with disabilities.

    Mark, this is supposed to be a forum for Left-minded people, you know, the people who are a bunch of crazies in your mind?   The ones who think that people should come first and not your economic houses of worship like wall street and free markets.  Maybe you mistook "liberal" for "libertarian?"

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Mark R
      Mar 30, 2010 @ 07:22AM PT
      Mark R

      Hal, you haven't "debated" anything so far. All you do is keep changing the subject and calling me names. That's not a debate.

      ... and I'm going to have to call BS on your claim that demand doesn't drive prices... even on commodities.  You see, living where I live, I'm heavily involved in the energy trading business.  Even when gas was $4 / gallon, there were supply and demand issues.  China's population was driving more cars and building more buildings.  Venezuela's oil production was way down.  Iraq's production was nearly non-existent.

      You keep spouting items like they were facts when they're total fiction.

      This is a forum for *CHANGE*.  Just because my opinion of change is different from yours doesn't mean I have to leave. I happen to think my ideas *ARE* about people.  The difference is, in my idea, the government doesn't rob those who are actually providing services to the population and give it to those who are not.  If someone came in to your house and took your money, even if they were going to give it to the poor, you'd still call them a thief... yet, somehow, it's OK when the government does it.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Mel Neagle
    Mar 28, 2010 @ 08:56PM PT
    Mel Neagle

    Mark R your problem is Texas rates somewher between 47th to 52nd on state level of pretty much any thing.  So when they fall 52nd that is a -2. 

     

    This is not my opinion, it is based on fact.  Pollution, teen pregnancy, worker protection, election poll violence, and the list goes on.

     

    Don't take my word for it, do your own research instead in assuming the rest of the country gets what you live with.

     

     

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Mel Neagle
      Mar 31, 2010 @ 07:20AM PT
      Mel Neagle

      You are the one complaining about Texas continuing to toll.  I do not know of a single toll in Oregon.

       

      I do agree with you on some policies.  A lot of the problems we face is the coporate medling in regulation is one.

       

      I do not want government run of much of anything.  The job of government is regulation & enforcement.  (What would a footbal game be without rules? Cage boxing)

       

      Capitalism without regulation is Facsism.

       

      The right wing always screams "deregulate", then when the cannot get that, they defund the regulators.  Corporate profits over the good of the people.

       

      I was born in Texas but one thing is for sure, "Happyness is Lubbock Texas in my rear view mirror."  Don't expect me back.

       

      Oregon is one of the greatest places on the planet.  Any other place close, they are throwing bombs at each other fighting over it.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Mel Neagle
    Apr 01, 2010 @ 05:42AM PT
    Mel Neagle

    What happened to the post, by Mark R, that was between my last two posts?

     

    Mark R had posted a web site for health care statistics.  I had gone to the site for review and found quite a few statistics to reinforce my first comment about Texas.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Hal Goldfarb
    Apr 01, 2010 @ 10:16PM PT
    Hal Goldfarb

    Mel:


    Mark R. is not a real person, or if he is, then he is working as one of the economic hit men for Halliburton, or one of those companies or their lobby groups.  He continually spouts the advantages of capitalism for the nations controlling world trade, conveniently overlooking the ecological, cultural, and economic destruction the US causes all over the world with its unregulated, free-market hipocrisy.  He is a phony, a mere mouth piece for the far right agenda of eternal global domination of world economics and politics.

    I would be at least a bit skeptical, approaching his chosen sites and sources wearing a protective filter to protect you from right-wing strangulation and torture of facts.

     

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
    • Mark R
      Apr 06, 2010 @ 10:21AM PT
      Mark R

      That's it Hal.  When you can't support your arguments on their own merits, just resort to name calling and trying to brand me as a "hit man."

      That is, of course, the most pathetic form of debate imaginable.  My positions are right here on this very page for anyone to read... and my rebuttals to your arguments, including plenty of supporting documentation are as well.

      Mel, there's a group of people going around "reporting" my posts trying to get them deleted. Apparently the truth is too dangerous to have on this page. We can't allow people to read opposing views and come to their own conclusions. That would be too dangerous.

      And yes, I know the page didn't show Texas in the best light in several areas, but as I said in my last reply to you, when you read the parts of the page that adjust for the influx of illegal aliens in this state, and the poverty, crime and gang activity that comes with them, the numbers are quite different.

      But honestly, this game of chasing your guys all over the place on every subject you guys can dream up has gotten old. Medicare for all did not make it into the final round of voting, so I no longer feel the need to continue playing your games. There are more important places I can be now... dispelling the myths of liberalism.

      Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
    • Reply to thread
  • Mel Neagle
    Apr 02, 2010 @ 08:26AM PT
    Mel Neagle

    Hal: Thanks for your input.

     

    I am familiar with the book "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" so your term has meaning in my vocabulary.

     

    I am sure Mark R deleted his own post after my post, stating my connections to Texas and passion for Oregon.

     

    Then turned tail with my comment agreeing with him with my opinion of not wanting too much government run anything either and stating "Capitalism without regulation is Facsism"

     

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Ute TenBrink
    Apr 02, 2010 @ 09:38AM PT
    Ute TenBrink

    Everybody in America deserves health insurance for a reasonable price. And especially when you sick you need your insurance the most. That's what is bothering me the most about our so called health care system; you lose your coverage when you can not go to work and make your monthly premium. Thats why we need a new system and let everybody have the option for private insurance if they can afford it.

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply
  • Mel Neagle
    Apr 04, 2010 @ 06:50AM PT
    Mel Neagle

    Ute: Thanks for bringing this Blog back to health care. 

    I agree, but remember, Health Insurance does not equal Health Care. (how is that for a bumper sticker slogan)

    I find myself just lost for what any single person can do to push for change and feel like it is making a difference. I will qualify for Medicare before anything we do today takes effect. This country needs to get back to a "We Society" instead of the "Reganomic's Me Society" which is why I am trying to contribute.

    We need to get the "for profit" insurance companies out of health care. In addition, we need to get health care out of labor.

    Think; what we could have had if, during our darkest hours last year, they had taken all the labor related health insurance premiums in this country and moved them into a "Single Payer - Medicare For All" system? The answer; A stronger "world competitive" manufacturing base and more than enough money to create the "Single Payer - Medicare For All"

    While this may sound like a great idea, people reject change.

    Canada created a health care system that is used all across the country. It started in one province and grew from there.

    I have one small idea, but do not seem to be getting any traction. About half of the states have a public owned insurance company (i.e. public option) set up to keep workmen's compensation rates under control. Most were started back around 1914. My idea is to modify these companies to include health care for all. I feel this is a way to get the single payer system started in this country at the state level. It can take advantage of the infrastructure already in place without the startup cost of something new.

    If anyone wants to support my petition, here on change.org, you can find it if you search for "The Public Option Already Exists in Several States, Can We Grow From There?". I am not sure it is appropriate to post the link here. I have sent the same text to the president, several senators, congressmen, news outlets, and anybody else I think of who will consider the concept.

     

    Report close

    You must be signed in to report content.

     Reply

  • Add a Comment

    Check Spelling

    Comment Policy

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

This idea was voted into the final round of the 2010 Ideas for Change in America competition. To view more information, including the 10 winners of the final round, click here.

Delete Idea

close

This user's Profile page is not public. They have restricted it to only their friends.

Already a Member?

Create an Account

You must create a Change.org account to complete this action. If you already have an account click here.

Cancel