I keep hearing folks say that it is unconstitutional for the United States Government to mandate that we, the American people, purchase the services of a private business. Several states’ Attorneys General have promised to sue the Federal Government if the insurance reform bill in front of the House of Representatives passes.
OK, I have a fix, at least for the mandate part. How about if we do not insist that everyone buy health insurance. How about if, instead, we say the following:
You, as an American Citizen, do not have to maintain Health Coverage on yourself. But if you opt to not carry coverage, and something happens to you, such as an unforeseen illness or injury, then you will be required to pay cash, up front, out of your own pocket or forgo any treatment for said illness or injury.
You see, right now, if you do not have coverage and something happens, you can go to a public hospital, get treatment, and simply not pay the bill. That debt then reverts to the rest of us, and our tax dollars pay for your treatment. You will have to be required to pay cash up front because we cannot take the chance that you will simply SAY that you will pay on an installment plan and then just disappear or allow your payments to lapse.
So you pay up front or you simply fix the problem yourself. That way we all can be sure that those of us who have insurance aren’t being double billed.
Showing posts with label death panels. Show all posts
Showing posts with label death panels. Show all posts
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Friday, December 11, 2009
Oppose anything the Democrats Attempt
This is a letter I intend to send to the four people who allegedly represent me in Washington, D. C.:
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Senator John Cornyn, Representative Michael Burgess, and President Barack Obama.
I will blog this and any response (if there is any) at oakminde.blogspot.com
I use the word "you" to refer to the Republican Party because three of the four people are members of that institution.
I have noticed that most, if not all, of the Republican Party seems to be opposed to any kind of national health care system. You call it a government takeover, compare it to socialism, and in Washington, you simply refuse to participate in the proceedings or just block the proceedings. Since you are opposed so vehemently to any of the suggestions the Democrats have put forth, I would be extremely interested in being educated as to what your alternative ideas are. I feel certain that the status quo, allowing insurance company executives rake in multimillion-dollar salaries while denying care to their customers, is not your plan. Or is it? I have not yet heard a single intelligent proposal out of the Republican wing of government. All I hear, day in and day out, are complaints that the plan(s) the Democrats have put forth will not work.
Now let me give you an idea. I pay $6,000 a year in premiums to my insurance company, to cover myself, my wife, and my daughter. They pay their CEO 18 million dollars a year. They pay several highly placed executives close to that, I assume. They also pay enough in dividends to entice investors to park money in their stock. All the while denying care to customers. Since the highest paid government employee makes $450,000 a year, I have to assume that the head of Medicare makes considerably less than that. I think you will have a difficult time finding anyone that is currently covered by Medicare who would be willing to give it up, so I have to think that that system works.
I would never be described as the "brightest bulb in the pack" but it seems to me that if I give that $6,000 a year to Medicare instead of a for-profit insurance company, and everyone around does the same thing, we might just be able to make it work. I would even bet that it wouldn’t have to be all of the $6,000, so there might even be some savings on my end. Even if it is all of the $6,000, as long as there is not some insurance company flunky declining to cover the colonoscopy that my doctor thinks I need (as my insurance company did earlier this year), I will be happy. You can call it a tax increase if you feel like you have to, but in my book, I am already paying that tax to a private company.
Certainly there are things that need to be done to cut out waste and fraud in the system, but I think that can easily be taken care of once we have everyone adequately covered.
For sure, this idea will put a lot of insurance folks in need of a new career. I, for one, do not care if the multi-millionaire CEO of my insurance company suddenly has to go out and find a legitimate job.
I think that if we adopt this plan, and demand that Congress uses it for themselves as well, we can adequately cover every citizen of the United States and ensure that the coverage is fair and comprehensive.
As an afterthought, I also included Senator Bernie Sanders in the recipients. I hear him on the (liberal) Thom Hartmann show every Friday morning, and he seems to actually care about the American people. He supposedly does not accept campaign contributions from corporations, only from regular folks like you and me. I don't know if this is true or not, but I do know that he sounds intelligent and informed.
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Senator John Cornyn, Representative Michael Burgess, and President Barack Obama.
I will blog this and any response (if there is any) at oakminde.blogspot.com
I use the word "you" to refer to the Republican Party because three of the four people are members of that institution.
I have noticed that most, if not all, of the Republican Party seems to be opposed to any kind of national health care system. You call it a government takeover, compare it to socialism, and in Washington, you simply refuse to participate in the proceedings or just block the proceedings. Since you are opposed so vehemently to any of the suggestions the Democrats have put forth, I would be extremely interested in being educated as to what your alternative ideas are. I feel certain that the status quo, allowing insurance company executives rake in multimillion-dollar salaries while denying care to their customers, is not your plan. Or is it? I have not yet heard a single intelligent proposal out of the Republican wing of government. All I hear, day in and day out, are complaints that the plan(s) the Democrats have put forth will not work.
Now let me give you an idea. I pay $6,000 a year in premiums to my insurance company, to cover myself, my wife, and my daughter. They pay their CEO 18 million dollars a year. They pay several highly placed executives close to that, I assume. They also pay enough in dividends to entice investors to park money in their stock. All the while denying care to customers. Since the highest paid government employee makes $450,000 a year, I have to assume that the head of Medicare makes considerably less than that. I think you will have a difficult time finding anyone that is currently covered by Medicare who would be willing to give it up, so I have to think that that system works.
I would never be described as the "brightest bulb in the pack" but it seems to me that if I give that $6,000 a year to Medicare instead of a for-profit insurance company, and everyone around does the same thing, we might just be able to make it work. I would even bet that it wouldn’t have to be all of the $6,000, so there might even be some savings on my end. Even if it is all of the $6,000, as long as there is not some insurance company flunky declining to cover the colonoscopy that my doctor thinks I need (as my insurance company did earlier this year), I will be happy. You can call it a tax increase if you feel like you have to, but in my book, I am already paying that tax to a private company.
Certainly there are things that need to be done to cut out waste and fraud in the system, but I think that can easily be taken care of once we have everyone adequately covered.
For sure, this idea will put a lot of insurance folks in need of a new career. I, for one, do not care if the multi-millionaire CEO of my insurance company suddenly has to go out and find a legitimate job.
I think that if we adopt this plan, and demand that Congress uses it for themselves as well, we can adequately cover every citizen of the United States and ensure that the coverage is fair and comprehensive.
As an afterthought, I also included Senator Bernie Sanders in the recipients. I hear him on the (liberal) Thom Hartmann show every Friday morning, and he seems to actually care about the American people. He supposedly does not accept campaign contributions from corporations, only from regular folks like you and me. I don't know if this is true or not, but I do know that he sounds intelligent and informed.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Don't believe anything you read, and only half of what you see
It never ceases to amaze how otherwise intelligent people will simply believe what someone else tells them. They don’t seem to bother to actually look into claims they hear on the radio or TV; they just take them at face value. Let’s look, for example, at the recent health care debates. And I use debates loosely, there seems to be a lot of angry rhetoric from both sides, not even actually resembling a debate.
Sarah Palin made the ludicrous claim that President Obama would set up a "death panel", a panel of government employees, that would take a look at how productive a person is and make a determination of whether to pay for health care based on that productivity. Conservative media figures picked that up and ran with it like a fumble. They have repeated it incessantly, apparently believing the old mantra "make the lie big, repeat it often, people will believe the lie to be truth". In fact, the only thing that could lead anyone to even consider such a remark is shear stupidity or shear malice. You pick which it is.
The section of the bill being considered that this comes from provides for Medicare to pay, once every five years, for VOLUNTARY end of life counseling. With your doctor, not a panel of government bureaucrats. Something that Medicare does not cover now. This would cover discussions about living wills, how long you want to be kept on life support (if at all), when hospice would be appropriate, etc. It would NOT cover discussion of suicide or euthanasia.
I have not been able to confirm this, but I heard (from one of the conservative talk shows, so probably false) that Ms. Palin said something to the effect of "if Americans actually read this bill, they would be appalled". I must submit, Ms. Palin, that if you actually made it a point to know what you are talking about before you open your pretty mouth, you might actually be vice-president now.
I have also heard the idiotic claim that bills in discussion would spend our tax dollars funding abortions. It is illegal, right now, and will remain so, to use Federal moneys to fund abortion, except in cases of rape, incest, or where the mother’s life is in danger. Now I know that there are folks who don’t believe a woman should be able to have an abortion in even these circumstances, but those folks likely need to be beaten anyway.
And while I am on this subject, why do I keep hearing people talk about abortion as birth control? Last I checked, a condom was about a buck. I haven’t actually looked into it, but something tells me that abortions cost a heckuva lot more than a buck. Who can afford that kind of birth control? Frankly, if a woman has that kind of cash and wants to ruin her future reproductive abilities, I say let her. Maybe that branch of the stupid gene will end with her.
I drive around most of the day, so I listen to a lot of talk radio. I mix it up, I listen to one of the eight conservative stations, then to the one liberal station, then another of the eight, then back to the one, and so on.
I keep hearing, from the conservatives, how concerned they are about our taxes going up. I have to remind you folks that those guys you hear from that box in your dash or see on that box in your living room make TONS of cash. When they talk about taxes going up, they are talking about THEIR taxes going up. They are not concerned with yours. It is difficult for me to take seriously a guy who makes 40 million dollars a year just from his radio show, when he tries to make out like he has the same financial concerns that I do.
Apparently, there is a lot of flap over advertisers removing their ads from certain talk show hosts shows. People talk about boycotting stores that do not want to advertise on shows that foment hate and anger, and repeat malicious lies to further an agenda. Boycott, folks. Stand up for the rights of rich celebrities to act like they are actual newspersons. Let corporate America know, by your unwillingness to spend money on their products, that you think folks should be able to use the public airwaves to advocate hate and racism.
It amazes me that, if Pepsi ran an add claiming that Coke caused cancer, Pepsi would be fined hugely. Yet any idiot can go on an "entertainment" show and make false claims about someone or some policy he doesn’t like and that is fine.
I think my bottom line here is, do NOT just believe something because you heard it on the radio or saw it on TV. Actually do some research. Find out that people with agendas will lie to further that agenda. Even me.
Sarah Palin made the ludicrous claim that President Obama would set up a "death panel", a panel of government employees, that would take a look at how productive a person is and make a determination of whether to pay for health care based on that productivity. Conservative media figures picked that up and ran with it like a fumble. They have repeated it incessantly, apparently believing the old mantra "make the lie big, repeat it often, people will believe the lie to be truth". In fact, the only thing that could lead anyone to even consider such a remark is shear stupidity or shear malice. You pick which it is.
The section of the bill being considered that this comes from provides for Medicare to pay, once every five years, for VOLUNTARY end of life counseling. With your doctor, not a panel of government bureaucrats. Something that Medicare does not cover now. This would cover discussions about living wills, how long you want to be kept on life support (if at all), when hospice would be appropriate, etc. It would NOT cover discussion of suicide or euthanasia.
I have not been able to confirm this, but I heard (from one of the conservative talk shows, so probably false) that Ms. Palin said something to the effect of "if Americans actually read this bill, they would be appalled". I must submit, Ms. Palin, that if you actually made it a point to know what you are talking about before you open your pretty mouth, you might actually be vice-president now.
I have also heard the idiotic claim that bills in discussion would spend our tax dollars funding abortions. It is illegal, right now, and will remain so, to use Federal moneys to fund abortion, except in cases of rape, incest, or where the mother’s life is in danger. Now I know that there are folks who don’t believe a woman should be able to have an abortion in even these circumstances, but those folks likely need to be beaten anyway.
And while I am on this subject, why do I keep hearing people talk about abortion as birth control? Last I checked, a condom was about a buck. I haven’t actually looked into it, but something tells me that abortions cost a heckuva lot more than a buck. Who can afford that kind of birth control? Frankly, if a woman has that kind of cash and wants to ruin her future reproductive abilities, I say let her. Maybe that branch of the stupid gene will end with her.
I drive around most of the day, so I listen to a lot of talk radio. I mix it up, I listen to one of the eight conservative stations, then to the one liberal station, then another of the eight, then back to the one, and so on.
I keep hearing, from the conservatives, how concerned they are about our taxes going up. I have to remind you folks that those guys you hear from that box in your dash or see on that box in your living room make TONS of cash. When they talk about taxes going up, they are talking about THEIR taxes going up. They are not concerned with yours. It is difficult for me to take seriously a guy who makes 40 million dollars a year just from his radio show, when he tries to make out like he has the same financial concerns that I do.
Apparently, there is a lot of flap over advertisers removing their ads from certain talk show hosts shows. People talk about boycotting stores that do not want to advertise on shows that foment hate and anger, and repeat malicious lies to further an agenda. Boycott, folks. Stand up for the rights of rich celebrities to act like they are actual newspersons. Let corporate America know, by your unwillingness to spend money on their products, that you think folks should be able to use the public airwaves to advocate hate and racism.
It amazes me that, if Pepsi ran an add claiming that Coke caused cancer, Pepsi would be fined hugely. Yet any idiot can go on an "entertainment" show and make false claims about someone or some policy he doesn’t like and that is fine.
I think my bottom line here is, do NOT just believe something because you heard it on the radio or saw it on TV. Actually do some research. Find out that people with agendas will lie to further that agenda. Even me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
