bumrejects.myfreeforum.org Forum Index bumrejects.myfreeforum.org
Open discussion on just about any topic
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Health Care Reform Act - court challenges
Page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 15, 16, 17  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    bumrejects.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> National Politics
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
tsiya



Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 4017
Location: Cabbage Hammock

PostPosted: Tue Jul 03, 2012 6:07 pm    Post subject:  Reply with quote

The only thing more government ensures is even more government!


"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master".

George Washington

_________________
Bob

"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."
H. L. Mencken
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bieramar



Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 4441
Location: Taylor Ranch, NM

PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

coebul wrote:
Shifting the cost from the "Tax payer" to the "Premium payer" and enforcing this in the form of a penalty tax on the long view does only one thing.  It changes the line on the balance sheet from federal government to private sector.  The $$$ spent will continue to increase...

And what occurs to me?  

If I have learned nothing about the founding of this nation I have learned this country was founded on "LIMITED" government.  That concept has steadily eroded over the last 200 years.


It's about damn time!

Shifting the line on the balance sheet to the private sector from the federal government is the only way to decrease the size of government.

The federal government's subsidization of the private sector since the 1950s by taxing and borrowing, and then redistributing the dollars to the workers and non-workers whose incomes were insufficient to pay for health care or save for retirement - or even pay for their day-to-day basic needs - is the fundamental structural flaw in the U.S. mixed capitalist system which has created the welfare state over the last 60 years.

Too much mix, too little capitalism.

IF a small portion of the capitalist profits (new wealth) had been fairly* redistributed to the workers and investors who created the wealth so that they could pay for their own families' health care and save for their retirement when they could no longer work, we would not be in our present economic situation - and government "welfare" would only be required for those without families who were truly impaired from working.

We can't change the past, but we can create a secure and economically beneficial future for all. The redistribution of wealth resulting from the ACA is a good beginning.

*"Fair" in macro- and micro-economic theory and fact simply means that the newly created wealth is redistributed among the citizenry so that they can spend it to constantly grow "supply and demand" of basic and luxury goods and services.

It is simple logic - even child understandable, as it is the subject of countless nursery rhymes, fables and morality tales - that if the king of the castle stores all the food grown by his peasants during the summer, they will starve to death during the winter, and the kingdom will fall; unless more peasants arrive from some other kingdom.

Whereas if the king redistributes the food fairly, the healthy peasants will continue to work and play, redistributing the symbols of their wealth over and over again as the entire kingdom flourishes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
tsiya



Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 4017
Location: Cabbage Hammock

PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Today seems to be an appropriate day to talk about KINGS!

We kicked the last one's sorry ass out of here!
_________________
Bob

"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."
H. L. Mencken
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
scrutney
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 1536

PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bier wrote:
It is simple logic - even child understandable, as it is the subject of countless nursery rhymes, fables and morality tales - that if the king of the castle stores all the food grown by his peasants during the summer, they will starve to death during the winter, and the kingdom will fall; unless more peasants arrive from some other kingdom.

Whereas if the king redistributes the food fairly, the healthy peasants will continue to work and play, redistributing the symbols of their wealth over and over again as the entire kingdom flourishes.


and it came to pass that the king distributed all the grain stored in the royal silos and all the meat stored in the royal cold lockers, as it looked to be a long, cold and exceedingly harsh winter.

and the peasants responded as one with a joyous cry of; "hot shit, free food."

and there was much revelry and merry making throughout the land.

and it was indeed a long, cold and exceedingly harsh winter.

and as winter eased into spring and the sun warmed the land the farmers gathered amongst themselves and grumbled; "there be a nubian in the fuel supply. every year we bust our fundaments raising livestock and grain and every year the king confiscates the fruits of our labour and distributes it to the slothful, indolent peasantry. we say thee nay. enough is too much."

and the farmers put down their hoes and pitchforks and joined in the revelry and merrymaking, for winter was a long way off and what the hell? everyone else was enjoying a free ride.

but the wise little hen knew that the king and the farmers weren't playing with a full deck and she wasn't about to draw to an inside straight.

so she went among the peasants and said; "who will help me plant my crops?"

"piss off sister," came the response from the people as they rolled another keg of ale into the city square.

and so the wise little hen retreated to her farm, undisturbed for she knew that although right around the corner was another winter, she also understood that hard work and perserverance would see her and her family of chicks through the perils ahead.

and she worked her farm and her chicks grew strong and healthy, for hard work puts food on the table and sustains the spirit.

and the weather turned cold.

and the people awoke from their 6 month debauch and the first pangs of hunger tickled their innards.

so they went to see the king.

"don't look at me" said his highness. "the royal graineries are empty and the cold lockers are down to the last soup bone."

"but we hunger" protested the people.

"tough noogies, i fed you last year, look not a gift horse in the mouth." replied the king.

and there was much wailing, gnashing of teeth and great torrents of boo-hooery were heard throughout the land (not the least of which came from the king and his family, though they were muted, due to an inconvenient restriction from rope.)

and as the final royal limb twitched it’s last, the people milled about and said among themselves; “what now, we’re still hungry?”

“i know what we can do.” announced a member of the merry band. and he told them.

and the people, farmers, merchants and peasants alike, picked up their hoes and pitchforks and headed off into the night.

the wise little hen surveyed a groaning table, laden with the fruits of her field and surrounded by her loving family, freshly scrubbed after their day toiling in the gardens, their eyes wide in anticipation of a well earned feast.

during the hastily offered prayer of thanksgiving, there came a knock on the door.

“now who can that be?” asked the wise little hen.

“it’s us…your neighbors.” came the response.

and the people sat down to a chicken dinner with all the trimmings.

_________________
one man's terrorist is another man's folk hero
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coebul



Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 3285
Location: Northwest USA

PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bieramar wrote:
coebul wrote:
Shifting the cost from the "Tax payer" to the "Premium payer" and enforcing this in the form of a penalty tax on the long view does only one thing.  It changes the line on the balance sheet from federal government to private sector.  The $$$ spent will continue to increase...

And what occurs to me?  

If I have learned nothing about the founding of this nation I have learned this country was founded on "LIMITED" government.  That concept has steadily eroded over the last 200 years.


It's about damn time!

Shifting the line on the balance sheet to the private sector from the federal government is the only way to decrease the size of government.

The federal government's subsidization of the private sector since the 1950s by taxing and borrowing, and then redistributing the dollars to the workers and non-workers whose incomes were insufficient to pay for health care or save for retirement - or even pay for their day-to-day basic needs - is the fundamental structural flaw in the U.S. mixed capitalist system which has created the welfare state over the last 60 years.
About damn time what.  Shifting the deficit to the privates sector does nothing?  No shit skippy.

bieramar wrote:
Too much mix, too little capitalism.
It's about damn time!
_________________
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
tsiya



Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 4017
Location: Cabbage Hammock

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2012 1:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Romania’s 20-Year Nightmare: Unraveling Socialized Health Care

July 6, 2012 - 7:27 am - by Ion Mihai Pacepa
     
In my other life in Communist Romania, I managed a large intelligence organization that, among other tasks, was charged with keeping alive a nationalized health care system which in the end bankrupted the country and generated popular contempt. That system, very similar to the Affordable Health Care for America Act, was a bureaucratic nightmare. And it still is a nightmare in the former Soviet empire.

A European Union report on post-Communist Romania’s “Health Care System in Transition” stated that this system “devastated the country,” whose infant mortality rate (20.2 per 1,000) was among the highest in Europe and whose death rate was 70% higher that the EU average.[i] The world’s leading general medical journal, The Lancet, reported that even twenty years after the Soviet Union collapsed, “life expectancy at birth is 66 years for Russians; 16 years less than for people in Japan and 14 less than the European Union average.”[ii]

My past experience gave me reason to believe that the recent decision of the U.S. Supreme Court to keep the Affordable Health Care for America Act alive constituted a much needed wake-up call for our conservative movement. Since 2009, when the Democratic Party began surreptitiously nationalizing the U.S. health care system, our conservative movement has done nothing but weep and wail and wait for God in heaven and the Supreme Court on earth to save America from such a calamity.

It is time for us to paddle our own canoe. The first three words in the U.S. Constitution are “We the people.” So let us have “we the people” decide what kind of health care we want, because our tax money is paying for it. In order to make responsible decisions in the November election, “we the people” need to know the truth: the United States is today rated No. 1 in the world when it comes to medical responsiveness and quality of health care, and there is no reason to rush to change our system overnight.

In the U.S., the doctor is king. This is crucial for saving people’s lives. If the doctor thinks there is something wrong with his patient, he can immediately start all kinds of diagnostic tests, get the results as soon as possible, and start treatment immediately. Yet in Great Britain, where the nationalized health care system is managed by bureaucrats, a patient has to wait some 18 weeks for an MRI.

In the U.S., a person can be scheduled for surgery the next day, but in Canada’s nationalized health care system, one has to wait months for a surgery. In the U.S., a doctor’s ability to act quickly without having to wait for bureaucratic approvals can make the difference between life and death.

The Nobel Prize for medicine tells the rest of the story. During the last century, the United States’ free market medical care system was rewarded with 72 Nobel prizes. The Soviet Union, which invented the nationalized health care system, won none. Zero. (Tsarist Russia did get one Nobel Prize for medicine in 1904, for Pavlov’s conditional reflex theory.)

Another truth: the U.S. health care system can and should be improved, but in 2008 and 2009 the country was going through the second-worst economic crisis in its history, and improving the economy should have been the most immediate task. When the Democratic Party came to power, however, it had been so infected by Marxism that it started its reign by nationalizing our health care system. This has always been the first thing Marxist rulers do whenever they take over.

Health care is vital to everyone, and wherever the Marxists have been able to seize the political reins they have begun consolidating their rule by nationalizing the health care system. In 1948, after Romania’s Marxist leaders assembled that country’s first Marxist government, they proudly proclaimed that they were getting rid of the old “capitalist” health system that cared only for the rich, and were replacing it with a “socialist system” that “would provide health care to every Romanian.” No one there knew what that “socialist system” looked like, but its populist appeal made it sound good, and most Romanians cheered. I did too, and I paid a heavy price for that.

One more truth: the U.S. has gradually evolved from a country using black slave labor into a country that freely elected a black American as president. The “Affordable Health Care for America Act,” however, was imposed on the country overnight, the same way the Marxist health care system was imposed on Romania. It is the devil who is always in a hurry. According to the U.S. Senate Historical Office, the Affordable Health Care for America Act was the second bill in history that the Senate approved on Christmas Eve. The first was in 1895, when the Senate passed a bill regarding the employment of former Confederate soldiers. That was a real Christmas present. The 2009 bill was a gift from the devil, and it was passed secretly, at the witching hour of midnight.

America’s health care system represents one-sixth of the economy. The total U.S. gross domestic product is $14.1 trillion, and one-sixth means about $2.35 trillion. Considering that the length of a dollar bill is 6.4 inches, a trillion dollar bills laid end to end would make a chain 96,906,565.66 miles long — extending almost 4 million miles beyond the sun.[iii] This unimaginably immense amount of tax money was paid by “we the people,” who should at the very least have been given a say about how it was to be spent.

“We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it,” said Nancy Pelosi, at that time speaker of the Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives, talking to the 2010 Legislative Conference for the National Association of Counties. That was a first in U.S. history. That would have been the norm in the old Eastern Europe, whose Marxist governments were always clouded in secrecy.

A few years after Romania was blessed with a nationalized health care system managed by bureaucrats instead of doctors, the country’s hospitals became so badly degraded that there were frequent cases where two people had to be put in the same bed. Sauve qui peut became the catchword of the privileged Marxist nomenklatura, which took its own health care out of the hands of the hospitals destined to serve “the idiots,” as Romania’s president Nicolae Ceausescu called his people. The Communist Party seized the Helias, a hospital built by a Western foundation, and ordained that it exclusively serve the needs of the party nomenklatura. The Securitate, Romania’s version of the KGB, took over a private hospital (named for a Dr. Dimitrie Gerota) and transformed it into a medical center (renamed Dr. Victor Babes) exclusively destined to serve its personnel. So did the Ministry of Defense. In the 1970s, I myself even built a hospital for my foreign intelligence service, the DIE. The hospital had no name and it was hidden away in the Băneasa Forest near Bucharest, to be protected from the eyes of the “idiots.”

Our American political servants who mindlessly approved the 2,000-plus pages of the Affordable Health Care for America Act also scrambled for cover. All, from those working in Congress to those working in White House, granted themselves American versions of Helias and Gerota. None of them wanted to put his life in the hands of a nationalized health care system run by bureaucrats. Some 1,200 companies that had given grants to the Democratic Party and  labor unions representing 543,812 workers also received waivers from part of the health care reform law.

I have written elsewhere — but it is worth repeating — about another disastrous consequence of a health care system run by bureaucrats: baksheesh. People in the U.S. are not used to having to pay bribes to get things done. In Communist Romania, however, baksheesh was the only way to get an appointment with a reliable doctor or a clean bed in a hospital. In 2008 The Lancet reported that in Russia each doctor and nurse still had “his or her little tax,” and that “they all prefer cash in envelopes, of course.” Nurses took 50 rubles to empty a bedpan and 200 rubles to give an enema. Operations started at 300 rubles, but “the sky’s the limit.”[iv] In the U.S., baksheesh might not start out as such blatant bribes, but bribery is sure to soon become the rule in one way or another. In France, for instance, the government bureaucracy recently introduced a €1 franchise on every medical consultation, described as a contribution au remboursement de la dette sociale (contribution to the repayment of the social debt). That was followed by an €18 franchise on “costly” medical procedures. Now the French patients are learning that if they discreetly slip an envelope with cash into the pocket of the doctor’s white lab coat hanging in his office, they will get more “attention.” A little extra attention may be vital in such a government-run health care system, where doctors are obliged by law to see sixty to seventy patients a day.

One of the greatest myths about Marxism is the supposed virtue of equality for all. If only everybody could have the same of everything, the world would be an earthly paradise. All Marxists believe that only the state can create that paradise. That utopian ideal has now captured people’s imagination in the United States as well. I spent many years in the inner sanctum of a Marxist government that was preaching this utopian ideal of equality, and I learned for a fact that it is nothing but science fiction. Lies. Dust in people’s eyes. I have co-written a whole book about that, which may soon appear on the market. But pictures are often better than words. My fellow Romanians, who paid with 1,104 lives to free themselves from their Marxist paradise, have provided us with some painfully vivid pictures: a 2007 movie called The Death of Mr. Lazarescu, which won more than twenty international prizes.

There is no better way to visualize the eventual disaster that a nationalized health care system can generate than to watch The Death of Mr. Lazarescu. This movie was inspired by the heartbreaking true story of Constantin Nica, a real retired Romanian engineer who had the misfortune of growing old in a country that still maintained a nightmarish government health care bureaucracy twenty years after its last Communist dictator was gunned down by his own people.

The movie’s script follows the fictional Mr. Lazarescu as a Romanian government ambulance shuttles him from one government-owned hospital to the next. At the first three hospitals, although the doctors determine that he does need surgery, the government bureaucracy refuses to take him in because he is too old and does not have enough money to give baksheesh to the hospital personnel. Mr. Lazarescu stubbornly refuses to give up, but at the fourth hospital, the evil bureaucrats win — he dies after a delayed and botched surgery. (The real Mr. Nica was in fact dumped by an ambulance onto a park bench and left there to die.) Mr. Lazarescu’s real enemy was not his illness, but the uncaring and authoritarian attitude so deeply ingrained in bureaucratic practice. The whole movie is so realistic that even The New York Times — a strong supporter of government-run health care — had to admit that the movie “absorbs you into its world”.[v]

I strongly suggest our conservative movement use The Death of Mr. Lazarescu as an instrument of election campaigning. Let’s show this movie all over the country, at conservative conventions, at major campaign meetings. It might be an expensive proposition, but it would cost infinitely less than fixing the long-term damage that could be caused by another four years of Democratic Party efforts to “socialize” the United States. This movie perfectly illustrates the long-range effect of having a country run by bureaucrats, not by “we the people.”

American filmmaker Michael Moore glorified British nationalized health care in his 2007 documentary Sicko, which premiered at the 2007 Cannes Film Festival and received a 15-minute standing ovation from 2,000 people. In February 2012, however, British prime minister David Cameron announced that his government would reprivatize the country’s nationalized health care system. For over 40 years the people of Great Britain have, over and over, watched their own The Death of Mr. Lazarescu. It worked there. It should work here.

[i] “Romania: Health Care System in Transition,” European Observatory on Health Care System, 2000, p.4.

[ii] Helen Womak, “RUssia’s next president needs to tackle health care reforms,” The Lancet, Volume 371, Issue 9614, pages 711-714, March 1, 2008.

[iii] Ross Kaminsky, “What Will Obama’s Plans Cost the Nation?” Human Events, March 17, 2008, p. 1.

[iv] Helen Womack, “Russia’s next president needs to tackle health care reforms,” The Lancet, Volume 371, Issue 9614, Pages 711-714, March 1, 2008.

[v] Stephen Holden, ” The Death of Mr. Lazarescu,” The New York Times, January 2, 2008.


http://pjmedia.com/mihaipacepa/20...ized-health-care/?singlepage=true
_________________
Bob

"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."
H. L. Mencken
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bieramar



Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 4441
Location: Taylor Ranch, NM

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2012 3:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ROFLMAO!

The previous article by Ion Mihai Pacepa is the most ignorant, illogical, and dumbest diatribe on this Forum this year thus far.

There isn't an iota of evidence, or even an hint of similar processes, to support his thesis that the Romanian "nationalized health care system" is "very similar to the Affordable Health Care for America Act."

What does "life expectancy... for Russians" and "wait some 18 weeks for an MRI" in Great Britain, and "wait months for a surgery" in Canada have to do with either the Romanian national health care system, or with the ACA?

Are there still Palinesque Death Panel believers around who don't understand that private sector profit-making corporate Health Insurance Companies - NOT "nationalized health care" - is what the ACA is all about?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
tsiya



Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 4017
Location: Cabbage Hammock

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2012 3:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have absolute faith in the ability of government, any government, to turn anything and everything into a big clusterf___k!

Your problem, Bier, is that you believe people like you are smart enough to make decisions for everyone else, and coerce them into compliance.
_________________
Bob

"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."
H. L. Mencken
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
coebul



Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 3285
Location: Northwest USA

PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote


_________________
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bieramar



Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 4441
Location: Taylor Ranch, NM

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Update on SCOTUS appeals: http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/02/pol...supreme-court-employer/index.html

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    bumrejects.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> National Politics All times are GMT
Page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 15, 16, 17  Next
Page 16 of 17

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum