kallend 1,771
azdiver 0
as said earlier haven't gotten all the way thru ( lot of shit to read in the bill, and your right there is a lot of bull shit to wade thru coming equally from both sides). posting the section u talk about would be helpful to debate instead of a your wrong, bash gop moreQuoteQuoteSEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.
(a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term `grandfathered health insurance coverage' means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:
(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-
(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.
(B) DEPENDENT COVERAGE PERMITTED- Subparagraph (A) shall not affect the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an individual who is covered as of such first day.
this sounds to me like " if you dont get it now you wont be able to get it later" i have not read the whole bill yet, but wouldnt that eventually lead to a single payer system if you cant buy coverage after this bill takes effect.
Try again. Please cite the page in the Bill before Congress that takes away your right to be a private patient.
(BTW, you misinterpreted the meaning of section 102 too - it applies to existing plans that do not meet the new coverage requirements. Other sections of the bill deal with setting up private plans that DO meet the coverage requirements. Not surprising you'd be misled, though, given all the lies and disinformation being pushed by the right)
light travels faster than sound, that's why some people appear to be bright until you hear them speak
kallend 1,771
See post #52 this thread for explanation. Also see p19 of the ACTUAL BILL.
Private plans are NOT outlawed. They just have to meet certain standards (like covering pre-existing conditions).
Private plans are NOT outlawed. They just have to meet certain standards (like covering pre-existing conditions).
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
billvon 2,659
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>thats not deceiving,thats debating
No, it's a lie.
It's like discussing the Iraq war and saying "well, I don't support the war because of the FACT that Bush destroyed the Twin Towers himself." That's a lie. It's not just a difference of opinion; it's a statement of fact that is deliberately incorrect.
The statement that you can't pay for your own care under this system because "a single payer system would take that option away" is a lie. I suspect you are unaware of that, and are just regurgitating some right wing talking point you heard. I would hope that, in the future, you take more care in where you get your information, so that you can make decisions based on accurate information and not deceptive extremist nonsense.
No, it's a lie.
It's like discussing the Iraq war and saying "well, I don't support the war because of the FACT that Bush destroyed the Twin Towers himself." That's a lie. It's not just a difference of opinion; it's a statement of fact that is deliberately incorrect.
The statement that you can't pay for your own care under this system because "a single payer system would take that option away" is a lie. I suspect you are unaware of that, and are just regurgitating some right wing talking point you heard. I would hope that, in the future, you take more care in where you get your information, so that you can make decisions based on accurate information and not deceptive extremist nonsense.
Maybe you should not make false assumptions about someone that you know nothing about!!!QuoteMaybe you should read the ACTUAL BILL before Congress.
***See, I guess I saw something that you did not. The congressman stated that there was an amendment that covered his son, there is not. So the question is, did the congressman just lie to try and make the guy happy or is he incompetent for not knowing what is in the bill that he will be voting for that will affect all of us?
I don't think that the father need to yell but it is foolish for you or I to judge him. He like so many people right now are scared and with good reason and sometimes that makes us react differently. It did not look as though he was part of any group or that his concerns were not sincere.
Are you sure? Show me in the bill where he will receive the same or higher level of care under the proposed bill because I have not found it yet.QuoteThe guy is misinformed. His kid will be taken care of under every plan being proposed.
Okay, you got me on this one because watching her is painful as watching beck and had nothing to do with the point that the video I referenced showing the congressman did not know what was in the bill.QuoteSince I watched your video, would you do me the favor of watching a couple of mine?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#32337941http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#32337799
I don't think that the father need to yell but it is foolish for you or I to judge him. He like so many people right now are scared and with good reason and sometimes that makes us react differently. It did not look as though he was part of any group or that his concerns were not sincere.
billvon 2,659
>but it is foolish for you or I to judge him.
Unless he's a Democrat. In which case he is incompetent, a liar etc.
Unless he's a Democrat. In which case he is incompetent, a liar etc.
What does party affiliation have to do with it? Did someone force the congressman to say what he did? What would you call a congressman who was going to vote on and promoting a bill that he did not know what was in the bill that could change millions of people's lives?Quoteunless he's a Democrat. In which case he is incompetent, a liar etc
Congress already got us over a trillion dollars in debt over a bill that both sides admit that they did not read.
quade 4
QuoteWhat does party affiliation have to do with it?
Because in reality, that's all this non-sense is about. Whenever you see one of these town hall meetings gone awry, take note of what party affiliation of the Congressman being shouted down. So far, NONE of them are Republicans.
If this was just about Congress not doing it's job, you'd expect the exact same treatment going on at ALL of the town hall meetings, but that's not what's going down.
People that financially back the Republican Party have a HUGE financial interest in not seeing healthcare reformed. They would much rather see Americans pay the highest percentage of GDP toward healthcare and still have some of the crappiest actual healthcare of any industrialized nation in the world.
Some of the richest fucks of the world have duped about 50% of the American population into believing the stupidest things imaginable.
But keep listening to Glenn Beck because clearly he's giving you quality information like that little cars.com thing you wigged out about the other day.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
mnealtx 0
Quote
Try again. Please cite the page in the Bill before Congress that takes away your right to be a private patient.Quote
In case you hadn't noticed in your (I'm sure) EXHAUSTIVE reading of the bill, it discusses INSURANCE - enough with the red herrings.Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
mnealtx 0
Quote>but it is foolish for you or I to judge him.
Unless he's a Democrat. In which case he is incompetent, a liar etc.
*rolls eyes* And of course, YOU *never* stereotype anyone....
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
And the same can be said for the other side that will make hundreds of millions if it does go through. I can tell you this though, any bill that has one group 100% for it and another group 100% against it is probably a bad bill.QuotePeople that financially back the Republican Party have a HUGE financial interest in not seeing healthcare reformed. They would much rather see Americans pay the highest percentage of GDP toward healthcare and still have some of the crappiest actual healthcare of any industrialized nation in the world.
Some of the richest fucks of the world have duped about 50% of the American population into believing the stupidest things imaginable.
I guess that one, you did not read my previous response, two, you somehow think he has anything to do with what the congressman said and three, that I waste my time watching him. Other than a link to youtube that my sister sent that I asked a question on another thread, you would be mistaken to think that your reference bears any truth.QuoteBut keep listening to Glenn Beck because clearly he's giving you quality information.
quade 4
QuoteAnd the same can be said for the other side that will make hundreds of millions if it does go through.
Oh? Really? Tell me exactly who you think gets rich off healthcare reform.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
Are you really that naive? No matter which side prevails, huge contracts will be won by corporations that will make millions.QuoteOh? Really? Tell me exactly who you think gets rich off healthcare reform.
You might think about reading the Aug. 6, 2009 BusinessWeek cover story.......hint, the headline reads "The Health Insurers Have Already Won, How UnitedHealth and rival carriers, maneuvering behind the scenes in Washington, shaped health-care reform for their own benefit "
quade 4
QuoteAre you really that naive? No matter which side prevails, huge contracts will be won by corporations that will make millions.QuoteOh? Really? Tell me exactly who you think gets rich off healthcare reform.
I hate to be the one to break this to you, but the CURRENT system takes in about 1 out of ever 6 dollars of our gross domestic product. It's going higher if we do nothing. THAT is why the insurance companies and big pharma are against reform. They want it to go much higher.
Right now the little guy is fucked and healthcare is a serious drain on our economy. Reforming it goes a LONG way to helping dig the US out of the pile of crap we're buried under because of it. Our manufacturing businesses can't compete on the world markets because it's so high.
The current system is a disaster.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
You are breaking nothing so far to me. But hey, knock yourself out with all the wisdom you think you have about people you know nothing about. I will tell you this though; I am a nurse and the business manager for an eight physician practice so please take your best shot at educating me on health care, cost, administration, billing and accountability. I only go to about three meetings a week on this not including seminars, continuing education and symposiums.QuoteI hate to be the one to break this to you, but the CURRENT system takes in about 1 out of ever 6 dollars of our gross domestic product.
I absolutely agree and we do need reform but the bill in its present form is not the answer. Congress is moving way to fast and making too many mistakes. They need to slow down. Maybe rather than trying to fix everything at once and making it worse they should take a modular approach by prioritizing and implement a section at a time, work out the issues and then go to the next section.QuoteIt's going higher if we do nothing.
Yeah, our ability to compete has nothing to do with labor cost, government regulations, liability etc. You might want to give that one a second thought.QuoteOur manufacturing businesses can't compete on the world markets because it's so high.
How do you come up with that? 82% of the population has insurance and 76% of those are happy with it. How is that a disaster? Now, do we need to make changes to control rising cost and a mechanism to provide at least basic health care to those who don't have it? Sure we do, but that does not make what we have a disaster.QuoteThe current system is a disaster.
kallend 1,771
QuoteQuote
Try again. Please cite the page in the Bill before Congress that takes away your right to be a private patient.Quote
In case you hadn't noticed in your (I'm sure) EXHAUSTIVE reading of the bill, it discusses INSURANCE - enough with the red herrings.
"Thread drift happens" - you wrote that.
Just responding to AZDIVER's untrue statement, chief:Quote
right now if your hmo turns u down for a treatment you can still get the treatment, you just have to pay for it. a single payer system would take that option away.
Do try to keep up, there's a good chap....
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
kallend 1,771
CARS.GOV.........Be afraid....forever!!!
Fact checking doesn't seem to be your strong point.
Fact checking doesn't seem to be your strong point.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
mnealtx 0
Quote
CARS.GOV.........Be afraid....forever!!!
Fact checking doesn't seem to be your strong point.
Speaking of fact checking...how's the vaccine for that "gun epidemic" coming along?
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
kallend 1,771
QuoteQuote
CARS.GOV.........Be afraid....forever!!!
Fact checking doesn't seem to be your strong point.
Speaking of fact checking...how's the vaccine for that "gun epidemic" coming along?
Hows the search for a dictionary, so you can look up "metaphor", "hypocrisy", "straw man" and "EPIDEMIC".
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
mnealtx 0
QuoteQuoteQuote
CARS.GOV.........Be afraid....forever!!!
Fact checking doesn't seem to be your strong point.
Speaking of fact checking...how's the vaccine for that "gun epidemic" coming along?
Hows the search for a dictionary, so you can look up "metaphor", "hypocrisy", "straw man" and "EPIDEMIC".
You get what you give - since you take other's metaphors as fact, you get the same treatment.
Where's the Koch postulate proofs and how is the work on the vaccine coming, or was your post admitting that your metaphor was a hypocritical attempt at a strawman?
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
billvon 2,659
>What does party affiliation have to do with it?
Easy. The congressman was a democrat, so you ASSUME he is ignorant or a liar. The guy in the audience was opposing him, so you say that "it is foolish for you or I to judge him."
If we reversed the situation, I have no doubt that you'd be supporting the GOP congressman who opposed Obama's health care plan, and thinking that the angry guy supporting Obama's plan was either ignorant or a liar, and/or was part of the Obama "machine."
Easy. The congressman was a democrat, so you ASSUME he is ignorant or a liar. The guy in the audience was opposing him, so you say that "it is foolish for you or I to judge him."
If we reversed the situation, I have no doubt that you'd be supporting the GOP congressman who opposed Obama's health care plan, and thinking that the angry guy supporting Obama's plan was either ignorant or a liar, and/or was part of the Obama "machine."
Try this, YOU ARE WRONG !. I guess you missed the part where I said “I don't think that the father need to yell”. And let me be very clear here, I don’t think ANY of the protest conducted IN the meetings are appropriate. They are fine outside but the meetings should be for listening to what is said and asking questions. Now, are YOU clear on that? You really need to get over this need to draw lines in the sand and place people on one side or the other just because something doesn't fit or is opposed to YOUR view. My question remains unanswered.QuoteIf we reversed the situation, I have no doubt that you'd be supporting the GOP congressman who opposed Obama's health care plan, and thinking that the angry guy supporting Obama's plan was either ignorant or a liar, and/or was part of the Obama "machine."
Quote>What does party affiliation have to do with it?
Easy. The congressman was a democrat, so you ASSUME he is ignorant or a liar. The guy in the audience was opposing him, so you say that "it is foolish for you or I to judge him."
If we reversed the situation, I have no doubt that you'd be supporting the GOP congressman who opposed Obama's health care plan, and thinking that the angry guy supporting Obama's plan was either ignorant or a liar, and/or was part of the Obama "machine."
It's unfortunate that the lies of Palin, Gingrich and their ilk on the right would goad the poor man into such angry, uncontrolled behavior.
If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.
ps. addressed other comments in previous post
Your interpretation is incorrect. Here is an explanation as to why it's incorrect:
www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jul/22/ibdeditorialscom/private-health-insurance-page-16-house-bill/
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.