Bush vetoes expansion of kids' health insurance program

[GaryC 7]

That is how it may start out but when costs start to go up the government will start dictating what treatments can be given and who can have them.

Currently, these things are dictated by the insurance companies, I don't really see how much choice there is, unless one is a millionaire. Take dental insurance for example, most dental insurance is way out of wack with what the actual costs of the the work. As a result, if you are unlucky enough to have defective teeth, you are either going to have them all pulled, or mortgage your house to pay for the work to be done. That's just crazy, and that's only teeth.

But I still have the control. With the government running things I have no control. Sorry, there is just no way anyone is going to change my mind on this. The government can kiss my butt if it wants to run my health care.

The only thing that will ever change your mind is when private insurers will not cover any pre-existing condition and you get stuck with what you have. God forbid you'd lose your job through which you have your insurance under such circumstances. Your control goes down the drain quickly then.

Since you don't know my personal position then you can't really understand. But I have had to deal with insurance not covering pre-existing conditions and I have also lost jobs. But I took care of myself and my family without crying that the rest of the country should take care of me. I have had in the past substancial out of pocket expenses and I did the right thing and paid them myself. Thats the problem with the world today, everyone expects hand-outs and easy way outs.

[almaty 19]

brother gary, so have i and most Americans..it called being a parent..but, some people are not so lucky or maybe , made stupid decisions when young..their kids do not need to have no or little health care cause of their lack of skills or income to buy proper insurance.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

That is how it may start out but when costs start to go up the government will start dictating what treatments can be given and who can have them.

Currently, these things are dictated by the insurance companies, I don't really see how much choice there is, unless one is a millionaire. Take dental insurance for example, most dental insurance is way out of wack with what the actual costs of the the work. As a result, if you are unlucky enough to have defective teeth, you are either going to have them all pulled, or mortgage your house to pay for the work to be done. That's just crazy, and that's only teeth.

But I still have the control. With the government running things I have no control. Sorry, there is just no way anyone is going to change my mind on this. The government can kiss my butt if it wants to run my health care.

The only thing that will ever change your mind is when private insurers will not cover any pre-existing condition and you get stuck with what you have. God forbid you'd lose your job through which you have your insurance under such circumstances. Your control goes down the drain quickly then.

Since you don't know my personal position then you can't really understand. But I have had to deal with insurance not covering pre-existing conditions and I have also lost jobs. But I took care of myself and my family without crying that the rest of the country should take care of me. I have had in the past substancial out of pocket expenses and I did the right thing and paid them myself. Thats the problem with the world today, everyone expects hand-outs and easy way outs.

At least you're true to your principals. I can respect that even if I don't agree with your take on the overall situation.

The one thing that bothers me the most about the health-care system in the US is that - compared to other industrialized nations - it delivers services to the smallest percentage of the population at a per capita cost that far exceeds the cost of any other country - including that of the US government run systems. In other words: It's a model of inefficiency that no government anywhere in the world is able to duplicate. No government is as inefficient as the private industry in this field. Not one.

Edited October 4, 2007 by Mr. Big Dog

[Peikko 1,575]

There is a huge difference between someone who is a victim of circumstances beyond their control (and health isn't somehting that is controlable) and someone who willfully neglects to take care of themselves. Your comments suggest that everyone who lands in a position where they can't afford health care is willfully negligent and that is simply false.

[Dan J 277]

That is how it may start out but when costs start to go up the government will start dictating what treatments can be given and who can have them.

Currently, these things are dictated by the insurance companies, I don't really see how much choice there is, unless one is a millionaire. Take dental insurance for example, most dental insurance is way out of wack with what the actual costs of the the work. As a result, if you are unlucky enough to have defective teeth, you are either going to have them all pulled, or mortgage your house to pay for the work to be done. That's just crazy, and that's only teeth.

But I still have the control. With the government running things I have no control. Sorry, there is just no way anyone is going to change my mind on this. The government can kiss my butt if it wants to run my health care.

The only thing that will ever change your mind is when private insurers will not cover any pre-existing condition and you get stuck with what you have. God forbid you'd lose your job through which you have your insurance under such circumstances. Your control goes down the drain quickly then.

Since you don't know my personal position then you can't really understand. But I have had to deal with insurance not covering pre-existing conditions and I have also lost jobs. But I took care of myself and my family without crying that the rest of the country should take care of me. I have had in the past substancial out of pocket expenses and I did the right thing and paid them myself. Thats the problem with the world today, everyone expects hand-outs and easy way outs.

The point of insurance is to spread the risk. But 16% of the the US population has no insurance. But they are still allowed to get health care. And in many cases, this leads to bankruptcy. $100 billion every year is spend to cover the uninsured. And its not the uninsured footing the bill.

This isn't about handouts or any of that health care industry propaganda. This is about making our health care system more efficient. Making sure everyone pays health insurance. Limiting costs, and making health care for everyone much more affordable.

You call yourself a fiscal conservative, but you are against the best thing we can do to make the health care system more financially efficient.

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

Socialized medicine sucks.

agreed

Based on what? Not your own experience, surely.

I can assure you it does not suck, from my own experience.

amazing you cut out the part i was primarily agreeing with

[GaryC 7]

That is how it may start out but when costs start to go up the government will start dictating what treatments can be given and who can have them.

Currently, these things are dictated by the insurance companies, I don't really see how much choice there is, unless one is a millionaire. Take dental insurance for example, most dental insurance is way out of wack with what the actual costs of the the work. As a result, if you are unlucky enough to have defective teeth, you are either going to have them all pulled, or mortgage your house to pay for the work to be done. That's just crazy, and that's only teeth.

But I still have the control. With the government running things I have no control. Sorry, there is just no way anyone is going to change my mind on this. The government can kiss my butt if it wants to run my health care.

The only thing that will ever change your mind is when private insurers will not cover any pre-existing condition and you get stuck with what you have. God forbid you'd lose your job through which you have your insurance under such circumstances. Your control goes down the drain quickly then.

Since you don't know my personal position then you can't really understand. But I have had to deal with insurance not covering pre-existing conditions and I have also lost jobs. But I took care of myself and my family without crying that the rest of the country should take care of me. I have had in the past substancial out of pocket expenses and I did the right thing and paid them myself. Thats the problem with the world today, everyone expects hand-outs and easy way outs.

The point of insurance is to spread the risk. But 16% of the the US population has no insurance. But they are still allowed to get health care. And in many cases, this leads to bankruptcy. $100 billion every year is spend to cover the uninsured. And its not the uninsured footing the bill.

This isn't about handouts or any of that health care industry propaganda. This is about making our health care system more efficient. Making sure everyone pays health insurance. Limiting costs, and making health care for everyone much more affordable.

You call yourself a fiscal conservative, but you are against the best thing we can do to make the health care system more financially efficient.

But my position is the government running things will be worse than they are now. I have zero faith that the governmnet can run something that big without it going out of all control. What we have now may not be perfect but it is better than what I believe would happen if the gevernment gets it's hands on it. If you want to understand my position just take a look at any government program of a large magnitude and see what happens over time. It becomes bloated and corrupt.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

But my position is the government running things will be worse than they are now.

Based on what, though, Gary? All indications are that any government, anywhere in the world (including this very government of ours), is doing a better job of running an efficient health care system than the private industry does in the US. That's a fact that you cannot dispute. So, what are you afraid of? Efficiency?

[Cantankerous 0]

I just have to keep wondering if I missed the part in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights or the Ammendments or something somewhere that said as an American citizen you will be fed and clothed and housed and receive health care because we are going to tax and tax and tax and tax all of you like you have never seen taxes before so we can pay for all of those things??? #######!!!

Edited October 4, 2007 by Cantankerous

[almaty 19]

I have zero faith that the greedy insurance companies will not rip off the american people and taxpayer...see iraq for a current exa,ple..

[GaryC 7]

But my position is the government running things will be worse than they are now.

Based on what, though, Gary? All indications are that any government, anywhere in the world (including this very government of ours), is doing a better job of running an efficient health care system than the private industry does in the US. That's a fact that you cannot dispute. So, what are you afraid of? Efficiency?

I look to the mess that SS and Medicare are in to base my opinion on. I also see $500 hammers in the military and government budgets filled with pork. Say I have no faith if you want but I just don't trust the government.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I just have to keep wondering if I missed the part in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights or the Ammendments or something somewhere that said as an American citizen you will be fed and clothed and housed and receive health care because we are going to tax and tax and tax and tax all of you like you have never seen taxes before so we can pay for all of those things??? #######!!!

Again, you're missing the central point: The health care system we have costs more per capita than any public system anywhere in the world while delivering less in overall service. The private industry has failed to come up with a sustainable modus operandi. It's fiscally irresponsible not to put an end to it.

[Dan J 277]

I just have to keep wondering if I missed the part in the Constitution or the Bill or Rights or the Ammendments or something somewhere that said as an American citizen you will be fed and clothed and housed and receive health care because we are going to tax and tax and tax and tax all of you like you have never seen taxes before so we can pay for all of those things??? #######!!!

Well its either that, or your crime rate will be going sky high because many people cant get basic needs.

A certain percentage of people at the lowest end of the economic scale, will have benefits subsidized for them. But everyone else would be paying on a private or public system. But with the savings with efficiency in a public system, everyone pays less than they do now, unless you don't currently have insurance, then it might actually be affordable.

But my position is the government running things will be worse than they are now.

Based on what, though, Gary? All indications are that any government, anywhere in the world (including this very government of ours), is doing a better job of running an efficient health care system than the private industry does in the US. That's a fact that you cannot dispute. So, what are you afraid of? Efficiency?

I look to the mess that SS and Medicare are in to base my opinion on. I also see $500 hammers in the military and government budgets filled with pork. Say I have no faith if you want but I just don't trust the government.

I'll take that over the $1000 dollar hammers of private health care and the pork of $25 million dollar salaries

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

But my position is the government running things will be worse than they are now.

Based on what, though, Gary? All indications are that any government, anywhere in the world (including this very government of ours), is doing a better job of running an efficient health care system than the private industry does in the US. That's a fact that you cannot dispute. So, what are you afraid of? Efficiency?

I look to the mess that SS and Medicare are in to base my opinion on. I also see $500 hammers in the military and government budgets filled with pork. Say I have no faith if you want but I just don't trust the government.

Medicare performs much better and more efficient than the private industry. The $500.00 hammer still comes cheaper than the $50,000,000.00 bonus if you get my drift. There's tons of pork in corporate budgets. Again, there's nothing that supports the stance that the private industry does a better job in terms of efficiency on health care than the government. There's plenty that supports the opposite. It all boils down to whether you support waste or efficiency. If you support the former, you'll be for the status quo. If you support the latter, you will support a public health care system to replace the existing wasteful private insurance machinery.

Edited October 4, 2007 by Mr. Big Dog

[GaryC 7]

But my position is the government running things will be worse than they are now.

Based on what, though, Gary? All indications are that any government, anywhere in the world (including this very government of ours), is doing a better job of running an efficient health care system than the private industry does in the US. That's a fact that you cannot dispute. So, what are you afraid of? Efficiency?

I look to the mess that SS and Medicare are in to base my opinion on. I also see $500 hammers in the military and government budgets filled with pork. Say I have no faith if you want but I just don't trust the government.

Medicare performs much better and more efficient than the private industry. The $500.00 hammer still comes cheaper than the $50,000,000.00 bonus if you get my drift. There's tons of pork in corporate budgets. Again, there's nothing that supports the stance that the private industry does a better job in terms of efficiency on health care than the government. There's plenty that supports the opposite. It all boils down to whether you support waste or efficiency. If you support the former, you'll be for the status quo. If you support the latter, you will support a public health care system to replace the existing wasteful private insurance machinery.

I guess I am for the status quo. I don't trust the government to do anything right.