PDA

View Full Version : President's Address to Joint Congress



Isabelle Warwicke
09-09-2009, 08:43 PM
I am currently watching the President's address to the joint session of congress live.

As a member of the opposite camp, I've listened to Senator and now President Obama with a grain of salt. I'm tying this as I have one ear and one eye on the TV.

I've realized what a truly great speaker he can be. I also love the fact that the new plan he has just annouced refuses to allow insurance companies from not covering a pre-existing condition. Placing a limit on out of pocket expenses. Refusing to allow companies to change your plan when you become ill. I really enjoy the idea that insurance companies will be held accountable. For those who have coverage.

For those who are currently not covered. Providing affordable coverage. Creating an insurance exchange, using incentives for companies who provide insurance. With consumer protection. Much like the plan congress already uses. For those who can't afford premiums, there will be credits given based on income levels. And he's using John McCain's idea to give coverage to those not covered, until the exchange is set up in four years.

Requiring businesses to provide coverage, giving hardship waivers and giving examptions to small businesses. Urging everyone to do their parts, and get coverage. Those who do not cover themselves are a drain on the rest of us, and that should never be if this plan is put forward.

He called out the misinformation, he addressed some of the darkest of those (Death Panels.) He called it out as a lie. The crowd roared to it's feet. There will also be NO coverage for illegal immigrants. And when he got a cat call on that, he gave the usurper a dirty look. And promised that no federal funds will cover abortions.

I'm stil not sure about the not-for-profit Public option in the insurance exchange for people who STILL won't be able to afford insurance under the new plan. It has to run one it's own funds and rely on the premiums that it takes it. Hmmm...to ponder.

I'm actually more on board now, than I have been in the past. I'm glad got an opportunity to see this speech.

I also LOVE that Hillary was in the front row in a bright red suit.

Isabelle Warwicke
09-09-2009, 08:58 PM
Full text of the speech HERE (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/09/obama-health-care-speech_n_281265.html)

Huffington Post has it all over their front page. Now is the Season for Action. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/)

Also, did the President's makeup look orange to you, or is it just my TV?

Selena
09-09-2009, 09:17 PM
And when he got a cat call on that, he gave the usurper a dirty look.


I also LOVE that Hillary was in the front row in a bright red suit.


While I'm glad I saw it, too, I wouldn't exactly call the look 'dirty'. Here's a screen shot attached. But yeah, he looked right at the person in question, though. It's Pelosi that looks shocked to all hell!

And Hilary? Bright bright red!! :aok:

Isabelle Warwicke
09-09-2009, 10:13 PM
He totally gave him the Eyebrows.

And Pelosi's dress just clashed with the flag.

Selena
09-09-2009, 10:36 PM
He totally gave him the Eyebrows.

And Pelosi's dress just clashed with the flag.


The prez gave ojo? (http://altmed.creighton.edu/MexicanFolk/mal_de_ojo.htm) Or just the bushy bushy brows? :snicker:

*rotfl*

Alchemist23
09-10-2009, 09:08 AM
Wow, the pres. looks a little evil in that picture. lol

Artemisia
09-10-2009, 11:27 AM
I'm so on board with national healthcare. I loved the snickers from the entire congress when the President said, "And while there remain some significant details to be ironed out, I believe..." ::kooky::

I still have questions.

How much is this going to cost me and my employer (not that I'm complaining)?

I work for a cleaning company. We have cleaners who cannot afford health insurance because of the cost. These people make minimum wage. Forcing them to carry medical insurance is going to cost them money they do not have. How is this supposed to help and are they really going to get an exemption because they cannot afford it? This remains to be seen because we understand there is government red tape.

I found myself yelling, "Yea, yea!" constantly at the TV. Especially after he said, "If you strike out on your own and start a small business, you'll be able to get coverage". ::clappin:

I love the way he explained the American mindset, "One of the unique and wonderful things about America has always been our self-reliance, our rugged individualism, our fierce defense of freedom and our healthy skepticism of government." ::hearts::

I hope the scare tactics stop, the details ironed out and we can get this done already. ::crosses crossables::

RichardMacHugely
09-10-2009, 12:02 PM
Personally, I am not for a UK style National Health Service, I'd rather we found our own path to universal health coverage that takes the best of what the private market can provide and mixes it with reasonable state oversight etc.

Having said that, I wonder why people are so dead set against the UK system. Here's the Wikipedia article comparing health care costs and results in the developed countries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_systems#Cross-country_comparisons

In short, the horrible socialist UK NHS spends a lot less money (that's on a per capita basis, AND as percentages of GDP and Government spending), and yet the Brits live over a year longer than we do AND they have significantly lower infant mortality rates.

Why are we spending so much damn money on our "private" system, when the British Public NHS does the job better and cheaper?

Artemisia
09-10-2009, 12:31 PM
Personally, I'd like to be taxed at the gas pump for healthcare. I don't mind to spend a couple extra dollars a gallon for fuel if it means all Americans can get healthcare.

I don't think that many people are against the UK model. I think the healthcare companies and greedy medical professionals worry they will lose their entire hold on this racket if something similar is put into place.

I remember watching a newscast on the UK system. It tried to scare those watching into believing the care they would receive would be substandard. It think it was FOX. Hey, I was waiting for The Simpsons to come on.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but don't doctors in the UK live a (what Americans would call) a modest life? No yachts, no garage full of cars, etc? Some professionals may not like the sound of that which is why they have lobbyists. I do agree the malpractice insurance situation needs to be fixed. Doctors shouldn't be charged an arm and a leg (no pun intended) to keep us all healthy.

Obama is trying. There are too many powerful people to please in this situation. I'm just happy something may happen. I hope it does before his first term is up. :wink:

Bronya
09-10-2009, 04:32 PM
^ I love what you just typed "his FIRST term is up":cheer:

letitfly
09-13-2009, 09:56 PM
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but don't doctors in the UK live a (what Americans would call) a modest life? No yachts, no garage full of cars, etc? Some professionals may not like the sound of that which is why they have lobbyists. :wink:


Hi,

You are definitely not wrong. That is why you find so many English doctors working in the US. England and Canada lose many of their best doctors. I have never heard of an American doctor emigrating to England or Canada to work in a public system.

There is a major political issues in England because so many of their doctors are foreign born. The Tories sponsored a bill to require language tests for immigrant doctors that set off a huge fuss.

http://tiny.cc/J9tUi
http://tinyurl.com/nzho32

Steve

letitfly
09-13-2009, 10:00 PM
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but don't doctors in the UK live a (what Americans would call) a modest life? No yachts, no garage full of cars, etc? Some professionals may not like the sound of that which is why they have lobbyists. :wink:


Hi,

You are definitely not wrong. That is why you find so many English doctors working in the US. England and Canada lose many of their best doctors. I have never heard of an American doctor emigrating to England or Canada to work in a public system.

There is a major political issues in England because so many of their doctors leave and the only way to fill the jobs is hiring foreign doctors. The Tories sponsored a bill to require language tests for immigrant doctors that set off a huge fuss.

http://tinyurl.com/mqu9u2
http://tinyurl.com/nzho32

Steve

letitfly
09-13-2009, 10:10 PM
Personally, I am not for a UK style National Health Service, I'd rather we found our own path to universal health coverage that takes the best of what the private market can provide and mixes it with reasonable state oversight etc.

Having said that, I wonder why people are so dead set against the UK system. Here's the Wikipedia article comparing health care costs and results in the developed countries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_systems#Cross-country_comparisons

In short, the horrible socialist UK NHS spends a lot less money (that's on a per capita basis, AND as percentages of GDP and Government spending), and yet the Brits live over a year longer than we do AND they have significantly lower infant mortality rates.

Why are we spending so much damn money on our "private" system, when the British Public NHS does the job better and cheaper?


Hi,

I wouldn't trust wikipedia on such a complex subject (I am a major wikipedia user but not for volatile issues).

I believe this link is an academic paper, boring, that concludes that a side by side comparison of the two systems is impossible as there are too many variables.

http://tinyurl.com/kk4zst

I think you will find also that American live expectancy is the highest in the world if you subtract our highway deaths and violence, neither of which has anything to do with healthcare.

Steve


PS: rich and powerful folks in England typically have private insurance. The lawmakers and NHS administrators are probably not sitting in line in an overcrowded waiting room hoping to see a doctor.

Laurensa
09-14-2009, 08:57 AM
Hi,

I think you will find also that American live expectancy is the highest in the world if you subtract our highway deaths and violence, neither of which has anything to do with healthcare.

Steve


PS: rich and powerful folks in England typically have private insurance. The lawmakers and NHS administrators are probably not sitting in line in an overcrowded waiting room hoping to see a doctor.

When was the last time you saw a US Congressman sitting in a crowded waiting room?

Stephen Hawking has lived about forty times longer than he was expected to, and he uses the NHS.

Dragonamant
09-14-2009, 11:16 AM
Mmmmmm

RichardMacHugely
09-14-2009, 11:35 AM
PS: rich and powerful folks in England typically have private insurance. The lawmakers and NHS administrators are probably not sitting in line in an overcrowded waiting room hoping to see a doctor.

True, which just shows that at all the scary talk about how "socialized medicine" will "kill" private insurance is a lie. The UK has had the NHS since just after WWII, and private insurance is still available to those who want it.

But I think the point is that in the UK, even the Poor and Weak have coverage, whereas here in the US, they do not.

Ysobelle
09-14-2009, 11:36 AM
It's Ysobelle, with an "e," dear.

Ysobelle
09-14-2009, 11:39 AM
True, which just shows that at all the scary talk about how "socialized medicine" will "kill" private insurance is a lie. The UK has had the NHS since just after WWII, and private insurance is still available to those who want it.

But I think the point is that in the UK, even the Poor and Weak have coverage, whereas here in the US, they do not.



Also, I think it's possible that we can build a new healthcare structure not based on any other country's, and have it functional. Most of the social programs we have now are essentially decades old, were built when our country and its demographic were vastly different, and have been patched, rather than actually updated and/or fixed.

RaevynCait
09-14-2009, 12:14 PM
It's Ysobelle, with an "e," dear.

BWAHAHAHA:snarf:

letitfly
09-14-2009, 01:19 PM
When was the last time you saw a US Congressman sitting in a crowded waiting room?

Stephen Hawking has lived about forty times longer than he was expected to, and he uses the NHS.

Can't say that I have ever seen a Congressman sitting anywhere but as they have good insurance, I would not expect to. Nor do I find myself sitting in crowded waiting rooms as I have good private insurance.

Do you really think that Hawking goes to the same hospital as, say, an unemployed immigrant? He is an elite and he gets the elite treatment.

Look at these two NHS hospitals and take a guess at which one Hawking gets:

http://tinyurl.com/lo9zw6

http://www.cuh.org.uk/addenbrookes/addenbrookes_index.html

Do you think his drugs were developed in the UK? No, of course, developed in the free market US system. Don't wait around for socialist medicine to develop a treatment for the rare or unusual disease.

http://www.kxnet.com/getArticle.asp?ArticleId=418710


I have only had tangential experience with the English system. My father had a rare and incurable cancer but made it several years with the concern and heroic efforts of one doctor. That doctor went on a sabbatical and my dad got an experienced doctor that had recently left England and emigrated here. Nothing had really changed with my father but this doctor just was not aggressive in his treatment. He said, "he has had a good run of it" and talked about the waste resources on an elderly and sick man. Before we could get a grip on the new situation, he was dead.
I have a friend that has survived cancer over 12 years and her English trained doctor said that she would have had to cut off her treatment after the first couple of years had she been in a NHS facility.

I have plenty of experience with the Canadian system and would certainly take my chances with the American system.

I do think we need something but it doesn't have to be at the speed that Obama demands. We have wasted billions on bailouts and clunkers for Hummers, we need and must take a very slow approach on health care reform.

RichardMacHugely
09-14-2009, 01:30 PM
>>>>Do you really think that Hawking goes to the same hospital as, say, an unemployed immigrant? He is an elite and he gets the elite treatment.<<<<


Well, he claims that he gets his treatment through the NHS. Upon what do you base your argument that he gets "elite" treatment? I should also point out that when he was first diagnosed, he was a penniless unknown graduate student, hardly the national treasure he is today, and he remained largely unknown outside Astrophysics circles for the next twenty years or so. It wasn't until long after he was fully immobilized and wheelchair bound that he achieved the "elite" status he has today. So, even if he DOES get special treatment NOW, it was the run-of-the-mill NHS service that kept him alive for DECADES.

Obnoxious know-nothing opponents of Health Care Reform are cautioned to learn something about Stephen Hawking BEFORE they start bandying his name about in their arguments, lest they expose themselves as ignorant blowhards.

I should also repeat that I don't support the creation of something like the NHS here, but I do support the idea of making sure that every American has some form of health insurance coverage. No one in this "richest country in the world" should be dying, or going broke, or even hesitant to see a doctor when they're sick, just because they can't medical treatment.

Ysobelle
09-14-2009, 01:38 PM
When we delay reforming the auto industry, it's harder to get innovative cars. People may have to find new jobs. Industries shake up.

When we delay healthcare reform, people die. Every day.

letitfly
09-14-2009, 01:56 PM
That is a bit harsh. I am not exactly an ignorant blowhard, blowhard maybe but not ignorant.
He goes to the Cambridge hosptial: do a little research on English hospitals and see if you conclude that all classes have equal access to a facility like that.

A previous poster stated that he has survived 40 times longer than usual. He should die of old age soon then as the average life expectancy is 3 to 5 years from onset, he was around 25 at onset so he is hitting about 200 years old about now.

A little too mush has been made out of his treatment by all sides. For most of the time he has had ALS, there was no treatment. The first drug was introduced in 1997 and only slows the progression in some cases but does not stop or cure it. About 10% survive more than 5 years and a handful survive 20 to 30 years. His survival is probably due more to his genotype than anything else.

LadyLaura
09-14-2009, 02:00 PM
This:


I should also repeat that I don't support the creation of something like the NHS here, but I do support the idea of making sure that every American has some form of health insurance coverage. No one in this "richest country in the world" should be dying, or going broke, or even hesitant to see a doctor when they're sick, just because they can't medical treatment.

and



When we delay healthcare reform, people die. Every day.

The current plan is NOT going to take away private insurance. We need some type of option for those who can't get private insurance and aren't covered by a government subsidized option. I am soooo tired of people with private insurance getting their panties in a bunch over this. Yeah, your doctor may get busier, yup, you may have to pay a bit more in taxes. Very selfish in my mind, to begrudge an entire subset of the population healthcare over these things.

letitfly
09-14-2009, 02:01 PM
When we delay reforming the auto industry, it's harder to get innovative cars. People may have to find new jobs. Industries shake up.

When we delay healthcare reform, people die. Every day.


Hi,

When was the auto industry reformed? All i saw was billions of tax dollars wasted to replace old gas guzzlers with new gas guzzlers. I just see business as usual except the taxpayers gave Detroit welfare. Real reform would have been letting them die and let new and innovative companies develop. Detroit learned nothing except that the taxpayers will be robbed to prop them up.

letitfly
09-14-2009, 02:12 PM
This:



and



The current plan is NOT going to take away private insurance. We need some type of option for those who can't get private insurance and aren't covered by a government subsidized option. I am soooo tired of people with private insurance getting their panties in a bunch over this. Yeah, your doctor may get busier, yup, you may have to pay a bit more in taxes. Very selfish in my mind, to begrudge an entire subset of the population healthcare over these things.


I cannot see why the company that provides my family's insurance would continue to do so if there was a public alternative. They, and other corporations, will quit, pay the fines and end the health care benefit.
I know it is supposed to be a deficit free, pay for itself program but do you really think that the Federal government will manage something so huge and complex in an effective manner? I can't think of much the government does well or with any sense of fiscal responsibility.

As far as panties in a knot, no one begrudges you health care. I just begrudge being asked to pay for it and I know that my taxes will rise to buy health care for others in any plan that is passed. I would like to believe tha President Obama can fund this without big tax increases but I don't see how.

LadyLaura
09-14-2009, 02:28 PM
I cannot see why the company that provides my family's insurance would continue to do so if there was a public alternative. They, and other corporations, will quit, pay the fines and end the health care benefit.
I know it is supposed to be a deficit free, pay for itself program but do you really think that the Federal government will manage something so huge and complex in an effective manner? I can't think of much the government does well or with any sense of fiscal responsibility.

As far as panties in a knot, no one begrudges you health care. I just begrudge being asked to pay for it and I know that my taxes will rise to buy health care for others in any plan that is passed. I would like to believe tha President Obama can fund this without big tax increases but I don't see how.

Under the plan, your company will not be allowed to use the public option if it is over a certain size, so there will not be a mass-exodus to the public plan. The insurance lobbyists will most certainly assure that, I wouldn't be too worried on that score.

As far as the tax issue, yes, it's going to cost money. But there are plan options in place to try to mitigate the cost of providing care, and remember, it won't be FREE, just affordable access. The hope is that some of the cost of healthcare in general will come down due to people taking care of illnesses earlier, fewer ER visits, etc. Once again, I'll gladly pay more in taxes for healthcare for all. I think it's a basic human right.

Selena
09-14-2009, 02:31 PM
As far as panties in a knot, no one begrudges you health care.



Wanna make a bet? I do not think it means what you think it means.

As a state of Texas employee, I have pretty damn good insurance my guy would love to have for himself. I pay nothing for it, btw, out of my paycheck. Nada. And for dental, it's something like $15/ month.

letitfly
09-14-2009, 05:09 PM
Under the plan, your company will not be allowed to use the public option if it is over a certain size, so there will not be a mass-exodus to the public plan. The insurance lobbyists will most certainly assure that, I wouldn't be too worried on that score.

As far as the tax issue, yes, it's going to cost money. But there are plan options in place to try to mitigate the cost of providing care, and remember, it won't be FREE, just affordable access. The hope is that some of the cost of healthcare in general will come down due to people taking care of illnesses earlier, fewer ER visits, etc. Once again, I'll gladly pay more in taxes for healthcare for all. I think it's a basic human right.

Hi,

I know it is in the plan that companies will not be able to dump employees into the plan but I am not optimistic on that score. The Iraq war was going to be over in days with little or no loss of US life and pay for itself by cheaper Iraqi oil. The South Vietnamese were going to win the war with 2,000 American advisers, Katrina, and on and on. I just don't have a lot of faith in DC to manage health care.

I do think that Obama is one of the most decent and intelligent Presidents in history and think he can design a decent plan but it is good to remember that he is an office holder only and will be gone in 3 or 7 years. The next person running the health care system may be Sarah Palin, Tancredo, Jeb B., Bill O'Reilly or Voldemort. I don't want Sarah having any say in my chidrens' healthcare. It could even be Dick Cheney deciding if you deserve treatment.

Gellis Indigo
09-14-2009, 05:29 PM
Once again, I'll gladly pay more in taxes for healthcare for all. I think it's a basic human right.

And this is what gets my panties in a bunch. Yes, you have the right to think that healthcare for all is a basic human right.

But, unless I've missed something in the past 8 months or so, it's not a right that's guaranteed by our Constitution. Therefore, why is our government getting involved in this?

If you feel so strongly about it, then volunteer to pay for an uninsured family's healthcare. But don't tax me into oblivion because of your beliefs.

What will the next basic human right be that I will be taxed to pay for? A home for everyone? A car for everyone? Guaranteeing that everyone has a good, well-paying job? Where does it end? It's a slippery slope that I'm not willing to ski down.

LadyLaura
09-14-2009, 05:34 PM
Hi,

I know it is in the plan that companies will not be able to dump employees into the plan but I am not optimistic on that score. The Iraq war was going to be over in days with little or no loss of US life and pay for itself by cheaper Iraqi oil. The South Vietnamese were going to win the war with 2,000 American advisers, Katrina, and on and on. I just don't have a lot of faith in DC to manage health care.

I do think that Obama is one of the most decent and intelligent Presidents in history and think he can design a decent plan but it is good to remember that he is an office holder only and will be gone in 3 or 7 years. The next person running the health care system may be Sarah Palin, Tancredo, Jeb B., Bill O'Reilly or Voldemort. I don't want Sarah having any say in my chidrens' healthcare. It could even be Dick Cheney deciding if you deserve treatment.

So, for fear of "possible" bad outcome, somewhere down the line, you would prefer we do nothing at all with the broken health care system, and let people continue to suffer... Alrighty then.

Me, I prefer that we try, and am optimistic that the United States is resourceful enough to come up with a workable plan that will neither bankrupt us, or provide substandard care. We have smart enough people here to figure this out and make it happen.

As far as who decides if I deserve treatment, I'd rather have Dick Cheney decide than some nameless, faceless insurance company with only their bottom line in mind.

Laurensa
09-14-2009, 05:40 PM
I do think we need something but it doesn't have to be at the speed that Obama demands. We have wasted billions on bailouts and clunkers for Hummers, we need and must take a very slow approach on health care reform.

No, of course not. It's only the poor who are dying for a lack of insurance coverage, but hey, they can always go to the ER, right? They won't mind if it takes another forty years or so to figure out how to fix it without it costing anyone a penny.

I'll say again, that 10-13 billion a month being poured down ratholes in Iraq and into Halliburton's pockets could pay for a hell of a lot of insurance.

Laurensa
09-14-2009, 05:44 PM
Hi,

When was the auto industry reformed? All i saw was billions of tax dollars wasted to replace old gas guzzlers with new gas guzzlers. I just see business as usual except the taxpayers gave Detroit welfare. Real reform would have been letting them die and let new and innovative companies develop. Detroit learned nothing except that the taxpayers will be robbed to prop them up.

Not just Detroit. AN ENTIRE STATE depends on those auto companies. You really think those new and innovative companies are going to start up in this country? They'll go build their cars in China and Mexico where labor is pennies per hour. What happens to the companies that supply the parts? What happens to the dealerships?

I'm from Michigan. My dad spent his entire adult life working in the Glass House at Ford, and since he wasn't UAW, when the company needed to trim costs, you know what they took? Yep. The white collar retirees' healthcare that they had been promised for all those 35 years they spent working for one company.
You'll understand if I take this shit personally. You're talking about utterly devastating my home state.

LadyLaura
09-14-2009, 05:47 PM
And this is what gets my panties in a bunch. Yes, you have the right to think that healthcare for all is a basic human right.

But, unless I've missed something in the past 8 months or so, it's not a right that's guaranteed by our Constitution. Therefore, why is our government getting involved in this?

If you feel so strongly about it, then volunteer to pay for an uninsured family's healthcare. But don't tax me into oblivion because of your beliefs.

What will the next basic human right be that I will be taxed to pay for? A home for everyone? A car for everyone? Guaranteeing that everyone has a good, well-paying job? Where does it end? It's a slippery slope that I'm not willing to ski down.

People do not DIE without access to their own homes and cars. The government does provide housing assistance, and yes, we do have laws that cover minimum wage and working conditions, last time I checked.

Laurensa
09-14-2009, 05:56 PM
People do not DIE without access to their own homes and cars. The government does provide housing assistance, and yes, we do have laws that cover minimum wage and working conditions, last time I checked.


Then there's that bit in the Declaration of Independence about "certain inalienable rights" including LIFE, liberty, and the right to happiness.

And what's that line in the Constitution? Something about "promote the general welfare", wasn't it?

Gellis Indigo
09-14-2009, 06:11 PM
Then there's that bit in the Declaration of Independence about "certain inalienable rights" including LIFE, liberty, and the right to happiness.

And what's that line in the Constitution? Something about "promote the general welfare", wasn't it?

LIFE - yes. Health care, no. I'm sorry, but one does not equal the other.

And as for the Constitution, you are refering to the Preamble. Check out this site (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#WELFARE) that explains "welfare" in the context it was used.

Welfare
welfare n. 1. health, happiness, or prosperity; well-being. [<ME wel faren, to fare well] Source: AHD
Welfare in today's context also means organized efforts on the part of public or private organizations to benefit the poor, or simply public assistance. This is not the meaning of the word as used in the Constitution.

Laurensa
09-14-2009, 06:24 PM
LIFE - yes. Health care, no. I'm sorry, but one does not equal the other.

And as for the Constitution, you are refering to the Preamble. Check out this site (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#WELFARE) that explains "welfare" in the context it was used.

Welfare
welfare n. 1. health, happiness, or prosperity; well-being. [<ME wel faren, to fare well] Source: AHD
.


There's a whole lot of people dying for lack of health care, which sounds to me like being deprived of their right to life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVgOl3cETb4

This is funny, but shameful.

Phoenix McHeit
09-14-2009, 07:30 PM
Welfare
welfare n. 1. health, happiness, or prosperity; well-being. [<ME wel faren, to fare well]

Well, the problem with posting a definition is... somebody's bound to actually read it.

Health, huh? As in, 'promote the general health'? As in, the good health of the general populace?

Good thing we agree, then.

Gellis Indigo
09-14-2009, 07:50 PM
Well, the problem with posting a definition is... somebody's bound to actually read it.

Health, huh? As in, 'promote the general health'? As in, the good health of the general populace?

Good thing we agree, then.

Interesting that you left a very important part of the definition out of the quote.
That would be this part, which was included as part of the definition of "Welfare" on the website I provided:


Welfare in today's context also means organized efforts on the part of public or private organizations to benefit the poor, or simply public assistance. This is not the meaning of the word as used in the Constitution.

Selective reading.

Phoenix McHeit
09-14-2009, 07:53 PM
No, I read it. In fact, I read it directly from the site you linked. And I read that the second part - the 'today's context' part - was the meaning not referred to by the Constitution. Especially since the two definitions are not, in fact, run together. They're spaced apart, as in two different meanings.

Talk about Selective.

Laurensa
09-14-2009, 08:38 PM
LIFE - yes. Health care, no. I'm sorry, but one does not equal the other.

And as for the Constitution, you are refering to the Preamble. Check out this site (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#WELFARE) that explains "welfare" in the context it was used.

Welfare
welfare n. 1. health, happiness, or prosperity; well-being. [<ME wel faren, to fare well] Source: AHD
Welfare in today's context also means organized efforts on the part of public or private organizations to benefit the poor, or simply public assistance. This is not the meaning of the word as used in the Constitution.

As a matter of fact, I have a copy of both the Declaration AND the Constitution sitting on my desk. I knew exactly what I was quoting.

letitfly
09-14-2009, 09:30 PM
Not just Detroit. AN ENTIRE STATE depends on those auto companies. You really think those new and innovative companies are going to start up in this country? They'll go build their cars in China and Mexico where labor is pennies per hour. What happens to the companies that supply the parts? What happens to the dealerships?

I'm from Michigan. My dad spent his entire adult life working in the Glass House at Ford, and since he wasn't UAW, when the company needed to trim costs, you know what they took? Yep. The white collar retirees' healthcare that they had been promised for all those 35 years they spent working for one company.
You'll understand if I take this shit personally. You're talking about utterly devastating my home state.

Sorry about your home state. Very sorry that unions have demanded more than the market can bear. Actually, screw your whining state and let the autoworkers get in line with all of the other displaced workers in America. It is a long line, they can get in the rear. Detroit has built crappy, gas guzzling cars that cannot stand up to the competition. The US auto industry is doing well. The moribund Detroit industry dug its own grave. I don't want to underwrite union wages, obscene CEO packages and retirement and medical plans far better than mine.
Is Michigan some special spot deserving of everyone else' tax dollars.
Guess what. There are many devastated areas in the country and no one is throwing tax dollars to the industries. There used to be a textile industry in the south. It could not compete with Japan, then Mexico, now China. It went away. My hometown was largely boarded up in the 70's - 90's. All of my relatives lost their jobs and pensions. The pensions were not a big deal; after 50 years in a cotton mill, you were lucky to get $80 a month. No lifetime health care.
Were you screaming for DC to ship truckloads of money to VA, NC, SC, GA when the mills closed? Hell no.
There used to be a thriving furniture industry in my home state until about 10 years ago. I don't know how many people were employed in the furniture industry throughout the southeast. Probably as many as the auto industry in Michigan employs. Today it is a dead industry. The Chinese copied the products, the US government connived with them, lowered tariffs, refused to help enforce copyrights and tens of thousands lost careers and benefits. I guess they sell stuff on ebay now because, not being those very special Detroit autoworkers, they were not entitled to federal handouts.
Ever been through Baltimore or Charleston? They used to build boats there. Then they couldn't compete. The yards closed, thousands unemployed, communities died. Were you so ready to send your tax dollars to the shipyards. I don't remember any Cash for Rusty Boat program printing billions of bucks to save those industry.

So, tell me again, exactly why should I go to work tomorrow to pay taxes to save your home state. Sorry, I take it personal also. Let them close up and rust away. The efficient car factories in Georgia and Tenn can crank up and hire some of the millions of displaced workers around here.

letitfly
09-14-2009, 10:32 PM
As a matter of fact, I have a copy of both the Declaration AND the Constitution sitting on my desk. I knew exactly what I was quoting.

The "general welfare" statement is in the preamble. The preamble serves only to give a brief explanation of the reason the following document was created. The Preamble was not intended to have the force of law and has never been considered to be. Courts do dissect it in order to discover what the framers intended.

Samuel Johnson's 1805 dictionary defined welfare as happiness, wealth, prosperity. There was no concept of the state assistance at that time. No "health care" in the Rev War period dictionaries either.
General welfare referred to the collection of states.

Gellis Indigo
09-15-2009, 06:22 AM
People do not DIE without access to their own homes and cars. The government does provide housing assistance, and yes, we do have laws that cover minimum wage and working conditions, last time I checked.

And the housing program and others like it are run so well by our government, so effectively, so efficiently, so fiscally responsibly, with little to no corruption...oh, wait.

Phoenix McHeit
09-15-2009, 06:29 AM
And the housing program and others like it are run so well by our government, so effectively, so efficiently, so fiscally responsibly, with little to no corruption...oh, wait.

So what you're saying is - programs aren't run perfectly, so therefore no one should even try ?

Is that how you encourage your students? "If it's not perfect, I don't even want to see it."

Gellis Indigo
09-15-2009, 06:39 AM
Is that how you encourage your students? "If it's not perfect, I don't even want to see it."

Wow Phee. Way to not get personal in a political debate. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go get dressed so I can go to work and discourage all of my students.

Laurensa
09-15-2009, 07:06 AM
[quote=letitfly;380730]Sorry about your home state. Very sorry that unions have demanded more than the market can bear. Actually, screw your whining state and let the autoworkers get in line with all of the other displaced workers in America. It is a long line, they can get in the rear. Detroit has built crappy, gas guzzling cars that cannot stand up to the competition. The US auto industry is doing well. The moribund Detroit industry dug its own grave. >>

You know what?

Detroit built what people asked for. If you made clothing, and all your customers wanted jeans, would you say "Oh, no, I think you need to wear dresses?" and sell only dresses, or would you sell jeans?

Laurensa
09-15-2009, 07:12 AM
Wow Phee. Way to not get personal in a political debate. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go get dressed so I can go to work and discourage all of my students.

Ah, you're a teacher.

Tell me, where do you get your health care insurance?

letitfly
09-15-2009, 07:27 AM
[quote=letitfly;380730]Sorry about your home state. Very sorry that unions have demanded more than the market can bear. Actually, screw your whining state and let the autoworkers get in line with all of the other displaced workers in America. It is a long line, they can get in the rear. Detroit has built crappy, gas guzzling cars that cannot stand up to the competition. The US auto industry is doing well. The moribund Detroit industry dug its own grave. >>

You know what?

Detroit built what people asked for. If you made clothing, and all your customers wanted jeans, would you say "Oh, no, I think you need to wear dresses?" and sell only dresses, or would you sell jeans?

Actually, if they built what people asked for, Detroit would not be failing and holding their hands out for corporate welfare. When offered a choice, their customers went to smaller and better Japanese cars. Detroit kept churning out the same old sluggish, boring gas guzzling junk. The corporate leadership failed to keep up with changing consumer desires, their products were bad. They lost and do not deserve tax money to waste again. With all this money poured into Detroit, what has changed? The only lesson they learned is that we can continue churning out junk and taking huge bonuses and the government will tax the workers in the rest of the country and give it to us.

I have a 98 Mercury Villager. Everything about it is worn out except the Japanese Nissan engine which seems like it will last forever. When the Detroit made elements finally rust away or wear out, the Japanese engine will still be running.

If offered a choice of one of two free cars, would you choose the Honda or the Plymouth?

Gellis Indigo
09-15-2009, 07:50 AM
Ah, you're a teacher.

Tell me, where do you get your health care insurance?

Yes, I am a teacher. I work for a private company that runs charter schools around the country. Where do I get my insurance? Through my husband.

And Phee, to answer your question:
Do I expect perfection from my students? Absolutely not. In fact, I won't write or implement an IEP that has goals/objectives that expect perfection, because it just isn't humanly feasible.

But do I expect that my students perform to the best of their abilities? Do I expect them to turn in assignments that represent their best work? Do I expect them to ask for clarification or help when a concept is difficult for them? You bet. And if they turn in something that is less than their best? They are the ones that are negatively impacted.

When the government runs a program that is less than efficient, effective, or fiscally responsible, millions of people are negatively impacted.

Phoenix McHeit
09-15-2009, 08:45 AM
When the government runs a program that is less than efficient, effective, or fiscally responsible, millions of people are negatively impacted.

But by not generating healthcare that is available to everyone, regardless of 'class', millions of people are already negatively impacted.

You'll excuse me if I'd rather err on the 'helping those less fortunate than myself' side.

Phoenix McHeit
09-15-2009, 08:58 AM
Do I expect perfection from my students? Absolutely not. In fact, I won't write or implement an IEP that has goals/objectives that expect perfection, because it just isn't humanly feasible.

But do I expect that my students perform to the best of their abilities? Do I expect them to turn in assignments that represent their best work? Do I expect them to ask for clarification or help when a concept is difficult for them? You bet. And if they turn in something that is less than their best? They are the ones that are negatively impacted.

Gellis, I didn't attack you personally. There's a difference between a personal attack, and making a comparison with a specific instance or example.
It was a rhetorical question, generated to point out how ultimately silly the 'well the gov't screws this up so...' argument.

I'm glad you encourage your students; it's what any good teacher does, and I wouldn't expect anything less of you. However you're applying a different standard to this idea of gov't healthcare. It's one of 'no, you had your chance, never mind that this is apples to oranges, you tried with X and it's not perfect so you can't be trusted to do well with Y.' If someone had told that to one of your students, I'm betting you'd be livid.

X doesn't work absolutely perfectly, with no bugs or glitches, so now Y doesn't even get a chance? That's silly , short-sighted, and self-defeating. (S-heavy alliteration, anyone? *grin* ) Not to mention, punishing the least able of our population.

LadyLaura
09-15-2009, 09:04 AM
And the housing program and others like it are run so well by our government, so effectively, so efficiently, so fiscally responsibly, with little to no corruption...oh, wait.

If you want to get rid of everything that is not run "effectively, efficiently, fiscally responsibly, with little to no corruption," I think you've eliminated the ENTIRE government, and probably a whole lot of corporations as well...

We've got to work with what we've got.

letitfly
09-15-2009, 09:38 AM
But by not generating healthcare that is available to everyone, regardless of 'class', millions of people are already negatively impacted.

You'll excuse me if I'd rather err on the 'helping those less fortunate than myself' side.

FORTUNATE!!!!! It is not a matter of being "fortunate." It is a matter of endless hours and endless work and high risk coupled with planning and responsibility.

No one "gives" my family health insurance. It is part of my wife's compensation package so, of course, the salary is lowered to pay for the insurance. It is not a matter of being "fortunate."

I don't know of anyone that has worked harder than I have over the last 30 years with never any guarantee of a paycheck. For our "Cadillac" plan, my wife puts in at lest 60, often 80 hours a week. If you work the hours we do at any wage, you can afford insurance.

Can't afford insurance? Get a job a Starbucks, they cover part time workers. Work your 40 hours at your regular job and put in 20 at night at Starbucks for your health coverage. You will still being working less hours than most of us "fortunate" folks with the corporate health plans.

Or do it the old fashioned way. Join the army.

Just don't ask me to work any more hours to pay more taxes to cover anyone else. If Obama can really find the money to pay for this, great. I hope he gets it passed tomorrow, but we all know that it will increase the deficit and raise taxes.

LadyLaura
09-15-2009, 09:47 AM
FORTUNATE!!!!! It is not a matter of being "fortunate." It is a matter of endless hours and endless work and high risk coupled with planning and responsibility.

No one "gives" my family health insurance. It is part of my wife's compensation package so, of course, the salary is lowered to pay for the insurance. It is not a matter of being "fortunate."

I don't know of anyone that has worked harder than I have over the last 30 years with never any guarantee of a paycheck. For our "Cadillac" plan, my wife puts in at lest 60, often 80 hours a week. If you work the hours we do at any wage, you can afford insurance.

Can't afford insurance? Get a job a Starbucks, they cover part time workers. Work your 40 hours at your regular job and put in 20 at night at Starbucks for your health coverage. You will still being working less hours than most of us "fortunate" folks with the corporate health plans.

Or do it the old fashioned way. Join the army.

Just don't ask me to work any more hours to pay more taxes to cover anyone else. If Obama can really find the money to pay for this, great. I hope he gets it passed tomorrow, but we all know that it will increase the deficit and raise taxes.

This. Absolutely insulting. Again, no one is asking for "free" health care, they are asking to be able to BUY health care at an AFFORDABLE COST. Plenty of people DO work plenty and still have no access whatsoever to a health care plan. These are the people who will be helped.

Biting my tongue before I say something I will regret.

Phoenix McHeit
09-15-2009, 10:02 AM
Yes, yes, you dive deeper and come up drier than anybody else, too. We know. :roll:

I don't have coverage. My husband and I both work for small businesses - mine is three people including myself, and his is 5. Neither of our bosses can afford to buy healthcare for us, and continue to stay in business. We cannot afford it ourselves, because of the skyrocketing cost.

I'm not asking for a freebie. I'm asking for a chance.

letitfly
09-15-2009, 10:06 AM
This. Absolutely insulting. Again, no one is asking for "free" health care, they are asking to be able to BUY health care at an AFFORDABLE COST. Plenty of people DO work plenty and still have no access whatsoever to a health care plan. These are the people who will be helped.

Biting my tongue before I say something I will regret.

And being able to buy it at an affordable cost would be a wonderful plan and I am 100% for it once the supporters can show how it will happen and happen for decades without imposing a cost on others. The same government cannot run Medicaid or Medicare with any sort of fiscal responsibility or even basic oversight to keep providers from robbing the system, why should we think that Obama and Congress will be able to cobble together one of the largest and most complex systems ever devised and make it work within a buget and pay for itself? It would certainly be a first.
The plan certainly does call for free coverage to vast numbers of people. Read it. The Kaiser Foundation points out that about 2/3 of the people without health care are too poor to pay for private or the public health care plan. they will be covered fro free. If not, little is gained.

Deficit Neutral? BS, the democrats, learning from Republicans, have decided that they can just ignore and not count 245 billion in costs. Our deficit is sufficient as it is. we really don't need anymore.

Let Nancy and Obama prove their claims and I am all for it but that ain't going to happen.

Jamianne
09-15-2009, 10:27 AM
FORTUNATE!!!!! It is not a matter of being "fortunate." It is a matter of endless hours and endless work and high risk coupled with planning and responsibility.

No one "gives" my family health insurance. It is part of my wife's compensation package so, of course, the salary is lowered to pay for the insurance. It is not a matter of being "fortunate."

I don't know of anyone that has worked harder than I have over the last 30 years with never any guarantee of a paycheck. For our "Cadillac" plan, my wife puts in at lest 60, often 80 hours a week. If you work the hours we do at any wage, you can afford insurance.

Can't afford insurance? Get a job a Starbucks, they cover part time workers. Work your 40 hours at your regular job and put in 20 at night at Starbucks for your health coverage. You will still being working less hours than most of us "fortunate" folks with the corporate health plans.

Or do it the old fashioned way. Join the army.

Just don't ask me to work any more hours to pay more taxes to cover anyone else. If Obama can really find the money to pay for this, great. I hope he gets it passed tomorrow, but we all know that it will increase the deficit and raise taxes.

I initially wasn't going to join this discussion, but this is incredibly insulting.

My father was laid off a couple of years ago. He's now 67. He works every hour he can get at a minimum wage job at the local supermarket just so they can pay the bills. He doesn't get health coverage. My mom is covered under medicare and almost all of her income goes to covering her premiums and her perscriptions.

He's not "fortunate" enough to get a job at Starbucks - there's not one near where they live. And he's too old to join the army. He's been looking every day since he got laid off for a new job, but no one's hiring and because of his age no one really wants him, either. So he took what he can get...but it doesn't come with benefits. And they'll only give him so many hours to work per week.

So I'm happy that you and your wife have wonderful coverage, but not everyone else has that many options open to them. But don't you DARE fucking judge those who don't have insurance or can't afford it.

Selena
09-15-2009, 10:36 AM
My guy, who's 43, educated and a professional (was a creative director for an ad agency) can't get insurance. Why? He was diagnosed as....

...7 lbs. overweight. :unamused:

Even if he can find someone who will insure him, the cost is some fuckme ridiculous monthly premium which just about matches my mortgage... and greater than his child support.

LadyLaura
09-15-2009, 10:44 AM
And being able to buy it at an affordable cost would be a wonderful plan and I am 100% for it once the supporters can show how it will happen and happen for decades without imposing a cost on others. The same government cannot run Medicaid or Medicare with any sort of fiscal responsibility or even basic oversight to keep providers from robbing the system, why should we think that Obama and Congress will be able to cobble together one of the largest and most complex systems ever devised and make it work within a buget and pay for itself? It would certainly be a first.
The plan certainly does call for free coverage to vast numbers of people. Read it. The Kaiser Foundation points out that about 2/3 of the people without health care are too poor to pay for private or the public health care plan. they will be covered fro free. If not, little is gained.

Deficit Neutral? BS, the democrats, learning from Republicans, have decided that they can just ignore and not count 245 billion in costs. Our deficit is sufficient as it is. we really don't need anymore.

Let Nancy and Obama prove their claims and I am all for it but that ain't going to happen.

So, to summarize, you are willing to help people as long as it doesn't cost you an additional dime or inconvenience you in any way. As long as you are OK, everyone else can go hang. If they don't have the privileges that you do, they must have screwed up somewhere, tough for them. They should be allowed to die of preventable illnesses, in a developed nation, or go bankrupt due to medical expenses. Because you don't think the government can run things the way you would like, you are fine with people suffering all types of dire consequences, because in your mind, they deserve them. Nice.

Laurensa
09-15-2009, 10:57 AM
And being able to buy it at an affordable cost would be a wonderful plan and I am 100% for it once the supporters can show how it will happen and happen for decades without imposing a cost on others. Deficit Neutral? BS, the democrats, learning from Republicans, have decided that they can just ignore and not count 245 billion in costs. Our deficit is sufficient as it is. we really don't need anymore.

Let Nancy and Obama prove their claims and I am all for it but that ain't going to happen.


Yes, and we had a surplus when Bush took office, which he turned into a crippling deficit.

Again. Get the fuck out of Iraq, and that 10-13 billion a month will pay for it.

EVERY other civilized country has some way of covering ALL of their citizens. Every one of them except us. We have the best health care in the world. IF you can afford it. If you can't afford it, FOAD, right? We're #THIRTY SEVEN in the world.

Gellis Indigo
09-15-2009, 11:12 AM
Yes, and we had a surplus when Bush took office, which he turned into a crippling deficit.


Which President Obama has managed to quadruple in a mere 8 months.

letitfly
09-15-2009, 11:45 AM
So, to summarize, you are willing to help people as long as it doesn't cost you an additional dime or inconvenience you in any way. As long as you are OK, everyone else can go hang. If they don't have the privileges that you do, they must have screwed up somewhere, tough for them. They should be allowed to die of preventable illnesses, in a developed nation, or go bankrupt due to medical expenses. Because you don't think the government can run things the way you would like, you are fine with people suffering all types of dire consequences, because in your mind, they deserve them. Nice.

I know lots of people that have no insurance, no money to pay and yet the mean old hospitals treat them even if they cannot pay. No hospital can legally turn away an emergency case nor discharge an admitted patient that needs treatment. Public hospitals cannot turn away anyone. I know several people with huge bills but in all but one case, the hospitals gave very reasonable terms and wrote off lots of the debt.

Again, I am all for this plan if it can be instituted as claimed. I actually would have no opposition to some tax increase, especially a federal sales tax. But I don'tsee how the nation can afford anymore deficit. Playing with the books to pretend the debt does not need to be counted is not what we need to be doing.
Yes, it would be great to spend the Iraqi war money on health care but I can't find that in the President's plan. I wish we had all of the billions spent by Bush and Obama on saving banks and car makers back to spend on this.

"If they don't have the privileges that you do, they must have screwed up somewhere, tough for them." this is the attitude that sickens me, the sense that those that have worked their asses off are somehow "privileged." I have no privileges, anything I have has been bought and paid for by work.
Both of us, especially my wife, have had opportunities to take better paying and less stressful jobs but with less medical benefits and a lesser chance of long term job security so we balanced the risks/benefits and stuck with the same old grind. We are stretching the budget now to start paying for long term rest home care that we may or may not live long enough to use. I am sure that 20 years from now there will be people bitching and moaning about those "privileged" few with "Cadillac" long term rest home insurance plans and yelling that they should be taxed to pay for those that did not pay decades for them.

A public plan would definitely benefit me if our benefits change. I am basically uninsurable with my medical history so it would be nice to know there was a safety net but equally nice for the country not to go bankrupt.

LadyLaura
09-15-2009, 12:35 PM
I know lots of people that have no insurance, no money to pay and yet the mean old hospitals treat them even if they cannot pay. No hospital can legally turn away an emergency case nor discharge an admitted patient that needs treatment. Public hospitals cannot turn away anyone. I know several people with huge bills but in all but one case, the hospitals gave very reasonable terms and wrote off lots of the debt.

Again, I am all for this plan if it can be instituted as claimed. I actually would have no opposition to some tax increase, especially a federal sales tax. But I don'tsee how the nation can afford anymore deficit. Playing with the books to pretend the debt does not need to be counted is not what we need to be doing.
Yes, it would be great to spend the Iraqi war money on health care but I can't find that in the President's plan. I wish we had all of the billions spent by Bush and Obama on saving banks and car makers back to spend on this.

"If they don't have the privileges that you do, they must have screwed up somewhere, tough for them." this is the attitude that sickens me, the sense that those that have worked their asses off are somehow "privileged." I have no privileges, anything I have has been bought and paid for by work.
Both of us, especially my wife, have had opportunities to take better paying and less stressful jobs but with less medical benefits and a lesser chance of long term job security so we balanced the risks/benefits and stuck with the same old grind. We are stretching the budget now to start paying for long term rest home care that we may or may not live long enough to use. I am sure that 20 years from now there will be people bitching and moaning about those "privileged" few with "Cadillac" long term rest home insurance plans and yelling that they should be taxed to pay for those that did not pay decades for them.

A public plan would definitely benefit me if our benefits change. I am basically uninsurable with my medical history so it would be nice to know there was a safety net but equally nice for the country not to go bankrupt.

Yeah, a hospital will treat you in an emergency situation, and send you the bill. Can you get care for a chronic condition, such as diabetes, high blood pressure, or anything else? NO. Prescriptions? No. Screenings for cancer? NO. Treatment for cancer? Nope. On your dime. Reduced payments? Yeah, sure. I have some friends who have experienced that first hand. One was left with a bill for $60,000 after the "discount." And all those unnecessary emergency room visits that could have been handled at a primary care, or would have never become an emergency if taken care of earlier? How much does that cost per year?

And yes, you are privileged that you and your wife are able to find jobs that have such good benefits. Not everyone is as lucky, and not everyone is able to KEEP such jobs, especially in this economy. Plenty of people work hard, for many years, and are not rewarded with such things, or have them taken away in an instant.

There are people out there choosing between food and medication. People who find a lump, and are scared to visit a doctor, because they have no insurance and know they will not be able to afford treatment if it's cancer, because they have no insurance. People who die of preventable things every day because they don't maintain treatable conditions. I'm not even going to get into the stuff the insurance companies pull on those who ARE insured when they are diagnosed with a serious illness. That needs to be fixed as well.

Everyone, even people with private insurance, will benefit from an improved health care system. Ours is the most expensive one on the planet, yet it does not provide the best care. That needs to change.

Jamianne
09-15-2009, 01:28 PM
Out of the 12 babies that were in the NICU when Rhiannon was there, 3 had insurance. Three. Of Twelve. She had one of the shorter stays at 2 weeks and her care came to somewhere in the neighborhood of a quarter million dollars. Over $10,000 of which I'm still trying to pay off before it goes to collections so that our credit doesn't go into the crapper. And that's *with* insurance.

Did her care actually cost $250K? Probably not. But the hospital 's going to make up for those other 9 uninsured kids somewhere.

In a lot of ways, we're already paying for the uninsured. Wouldn't it make more sense to reallocate those monies to actually insure them? To allow people to get regular care so that they're not forced to wait until something that would have cost very little to treat or even prevent doesn't then cost thousands or more in emergency treatment?

The system's broken. Is Obama's plan the best way to fix it? I don't know. But *something* needs to change.

Phoenix McHeit
09-15-2009, 01:55 PM
Which President Obama has managed to quadruple in a mere 8 months.

I'm sure you haven't forgotten what a mess he inherited. From Former President "Recession? What recession, we're fine!" Bush?

NOBODY would've come out of that smelling like a rose. And no, I don't agree with everything that Obama has done to ease the recession, but at least he did something - more than sticking his head in the sand.

Laurensa
09-15-2009, 05:05 PM
I'm sure you haven't forgotten what a mess he inherited. From Former President "Recession? What recession, we're fine!" Bush?

NOBODY would've come out of that smelling like a rose. And no, I don't agree with everything that Obama has done to ease the recession, but at least he did something - more than sticking his head in the sand.


Yes, but don't forget, Phee, the TARP bank bailout was all Obama's fault. Even though it took place in OCTOBER of last year...yep, this recession we've been in for the last seven years is all Obama's fault.

Ysobelle
09-15-2009, 05:34 PM
If we're going to get into the deficit, let's tell the whole story. Including the understanding that the recession started at the end of 2007.


http://www.miamiherald.com/business/nation/story/1228957.html

Selena
09-15-2009, 08:25 PM
House formally rebukes Wilson (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090915/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_heckling) for his outburst.

letitfly
09-15-2009, 09:22 PM
Hi,

Single payer systems are great but if you get cancer, be an American:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1560849/UK-cancer-survival-rate-lowest-in-Europe.html

or get heart trouble in Sweden:

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA555_Sweden_Health_Care.html

The system we should really be looking at is Germany, a working mixture of private and public funding with a strong profit motive intact.

And since this thread is somewhat related to economic issues, I am doing my spring cleaning and have lots of teenage boy jeans, all "skinny" types, mostly size 26 - 28, all from skateboard shops or Pac Sun. Brands like Fallen, BDG, Social Collision, drakes skinniest. Emerica gray cords, Hermosa (white). About 6 pair.

Also, a smaller pair of izod khakis, worn about 20 minutes, probably kid sz 8.
Size 1: bullhead jeans, hermosa jeans, fallen jeans, solana black khakis.
gap navy cords 8 slim.

5 pr gap cargo shorts size 12. one size 10, pac sun swimsuit about the same size.

extra small American Apparel hoody, light blue, wolrn a few times, lost for months, recovered.

Whole mess of skateboard shop t shirts. mostly boy small and medium.

a pair of good hiking boots from Great Outdoor Provision, since 5. worn 2 weeks in summer camp.

all very lightly used. one pair of jeans has holes in knees but they may have cost extra.

Cost is free if you need them though I would like to get the shipping cost back. My great preference is all to one person or at least by size. Most of the jeans were $30 - $60 new and have 90% life left. Some legs have been tailored to make them skinnier on a couple of pairs.

Available to the first email. Don't be shy, even you Mean Girls and bully girls are welcome to them. No exclusions to even the couple of you that want to reach through the screen and rip my throat open.

If you are on harder times than me, which is hard to believe, no explanation needed, just say so and I ship them free. Maybe parcel post so your kid may outgrow them first.

Anything to get out of my promise to put them on craigslist. If you are really difficult, I suppose I could shoot some group photos.

LdyJhawk
09-15-2009, 10:31 PM
Hi,

Single payer systems are great but if you get cancer, be an American:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1560849/UK-cancer-survival-rate-lowest-in-Europe.html

or get heart trouble in Sweden:

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA555_Sweden_Health_Care.html

The system we should really be looking at is Germany, a working mixture of private and public funding with a strong profit motive intact.

And since this thread is somewhat related to economic issues, I am doing my spring cleaning and have lots of teenage boy jeans, all "skinny" types, mostly size 26 - 28, all from skateboard shops or Pac Sun. Brands like Fallen, BDG, Social Collision, drakes skinniest. Emerica gray cords, Hermosa (white). About 6 pair.

Also, a smaller pair of izod khakis, worn about 20 minutes, probably kid sz 8.
Size 1: bullhead jeans, hermosa jeans, fallen jeans, solana black khakis.
gap navy cords 8 slim.

5 pr gap cargo shorts size 12. one size 10, pac sun swimsuit about the same size.

extra small American Apparel hoody, light blue, wolrn a few times, lost for months, recovered.

Whole mess of skateboard shop t shirts. mostly boy small and medium.

a pair of good hiking boots from Great Outdoor Provision, since 5. worn 2 weeks in summer camp.

all very lightly used. one pair of jeans has holes in knees but they may have cost extra.

Cost is free if you need them though I would like to get the shipping cost back. My great preference is all to one person or at least by size. Most of the jeans were $30 - $60 new and have 90% life left. Some legs have been tailored to make them skinnier on a couple of pairs.

Available to the first email. Don't be shy, even you Mean Girls and bully girls are welcome to them. No exclusions to even the couple of you that want to reach through the screen and rip my throat open.

If you are on harder times than me, which is hard to believe, no explanation needed, just say so and I ship them free. Maybe parcel post so your kid may outgrow them first.

Anything to get out of my promise to put them on craigslist. If you are really difficult, I suppose I could shoot some group photos.

Oh hold on, I'll find links too! Like a couple whose child was in NICU for two weeks and it cost them 100 dollars. Or how a woman in france got cancer..and lived! SHOCKING!

How about my friend with CF who got treatment to KEEP HER ALIVE in both the UK and Netherlands? oh my goodness..

Gellis Indigo
09-16-2009, 06:30 AM
House formally rebukes Wilson (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090915/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_heckling) for his outburst.

Saw an interesting take on this yesterday on the evening news (one of the "big three", not Fox).

Where was the rebuke when members of Congress booed President Bush during an address? And when he was called a liar, among other things, on the floors of the House and the Senate?

letitfly
09-16-2009, 07:10 AM
Saw an interesting take on this yesterday on the evening news (one of the "big three", not Fox).

Where was the rebuke when members of Congress booed President Bush during an address? And when he was called a liar, among other things, on the floors of the House and the Senate?


Yep. Bush was loudly booed and hissed during his State of the Union speech which is usually very formal. Clinton was also booed during one of his and a lot of Republicans stood and left about halfway through it.
I think the latest incident has been blown way out of proportion.

prospero
09-16-2009, 08:34 AM
I think the latest incident has been blown way out of proportion.

I would agree. Booing, hissing, catcalls and other rudeness are nothing new. There has been bad behavior on both sides since there were sides. It may be that the House would like to distance itself from the Angry American/Teabag style of communication thats so popular with the kids these days.

Phoenix McHeit
09-16-2009, 09:37 AM
Yup. definitely overkill. He apologized to Obama in person - that should've been satisfactory. If you don't want rudeness on the Floor, make it a Rule. Its sad that personal decorum must be spelled out, but apparently it must. If it already is a Rule, then enforcement should be equal across the board. But you can't pick and choose who gets called on misbehavior.

daBaroness
09-16-2009, 09:39 AM
Yup. definitely overkill. He apologized to Obama in person - that should've been satisfactory. If you don't want rudeness on the Floor, make it a Rule. Its sad that personal decorum must be spelled out, but apparently it must. If it already is a Rule, then enforcement should be equal across the board. But you can't pick and choose who gets called on misbehavior.

Like my mama always said (with her tongue in her cheek), Sum people just ain't got no class."