What does logic say?

[shadowmaster]

A number of years ago, the commonwealth of Massachusetts had a referendum about utilities. The utility companies supported the deregulation. It passed because people in Massachusetts are incapable of thinking. The utility companies made a lot of money. Where we used to have regulated monopolies, we now have unregulated monopolies.

At the present time we are looking at heath care "reform" nationally. Along with the White House and Congress “The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (is) poised to be the campaign's biggest spender with plans to spend up to $150 million in ads generally backing a revamping.”

Who will profit and who will lose out?

The shadowmaster wonders

[Eeset-Shadowgrl]

A number of years ago, the commonwealth of Massachusetts had a referendum about utilities. The utility companies supported the deregulation. It passed because people in Massachusetts are incapable of thinking. The utility companies made a lot of money. Where we used to have regulated monopolies, we now have unregulated monopolies.

At the present time we are looking at heath care "reform" nationally. Along with the White House and Congress “The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (is) poised to be the campaign's biggest spender with plans to spend up to $150 million in ads generally backing a revamping.”

Who will profit and who will lose out?

The shadowmaster wonders

You are wise indeed to penetrate the current hype about ensuring that everyone receives healthcare.

[shadowmaster]

You are wise indeed to penetrate the current hype about ensuring that everyone receives healthcare.

Wow, Coming from you

[Jedidiah]

When the government gets in to help us, you know who loses.

[Pilgrim]

So, you sending back your social security, medicade and medicare old man?

[Pilgrim]

A number of years ago, the commonwealth of Massachusetts had a referendum about utilities. The utility companies supported the deregulation. It passed because people in Massachusetts are incapable of thinking. The utility companies made a lot of money. Where we used to have regulated monopolies, we now have unregulated monopolies.

At the present time we are looking at heath care "reform" nationally. Along with the White House and Congress “The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (is) poised to be the campaign's biggest spender with plans to spend up to $150 million in ads generally backing a revamping.”

Who will profit and who will lose out?

The shadowmaster wonders

What does logic say? "Hello, my name is logic. I'm a deficitaholic"

[shadowmaster]

So, you sending back your social security, medicade and medicare old man?

Nope!

I paid for them, don't you?

and they still tax my taxes.

[Pilgrim]

Medicade and medicare are voluntary right? Social Security you have a point with.

[casaba]

Not quite with Social Security either. The current benefits are paid by current workers. By working for a certain number of years, supporting the current elderly, you gain the right to be supported by the workers when you retire. Such a plan was/is the only way of starting a plan from scratch without either an enormous initial investment or a very long lag time in benefits. In the '60s, it was decided that an unacceptable percentage of the elderly lived in dire poverty and so Social Security was started, paying benefits immediately. (I don't know the particulars on how 'minimum number of year work to qualify' were handled; obviously it had to intially be waived fully while now it stands at about 10 years.) The plan was and is a success: a far smaller portion of the elderly are living in poverty than before program started. Also, the program is and always has been running in the black, i.e. collecting more money than it pays out in benefits. And no, the money isn't 'just sitting there' or disappearing into deficit spending; it is being invested in the government bonds and earning interest just like any individual who invests in such bonds. Will it continue to be successful in the future? Short term of 20 years, most definitely. Longer term, it is unclear but all the naysayers who badmouth Social Security as 'another government failure' must be looking at different numbers than me, past and future. On thing to thank the current recession for (and GWB if you happen to share my belief in his adminstrations contribution to the current mess) is that you no longer have people begging to invest 'their' Social Security 'savings' into the markets.

(Pilgrim, I am guessing you know all this--most likely better than me--but I see so many misguided and flat out false statements regarding the US Social Security program that I often feel inclined to step up on the soap box when the issue pops up.)

[Jedidiah]

Medicade and medicare are voluntary right? Social Security you have a point with.

I don't get a choice with Medicare. I worked for 30 years, at a modestly paying job, for the lifetime medical benefits promised. It turns out that the lifetime medical benefits require that I sign up for Medicare. Now I don't have a family doctor any more. Big choice.

[shadowmaster]

Medicade and medicare are voluntary right?

Not in my country.

Social Security you have a point with.

I have given more than I can ever get back.
Then when I do collect, they tax that also.

They could be fair and make it vountary like it is for them.

[Conductor42]

Who will profit and who will lose out?

The shadowmaster wonders

one part you did notice,
but don't forget the bigger picture
many of the insurance companies lobbied against healthcare

some still do
some are only opposed to the public option

some will lose money but support it because they truly believe in healthcare for all. Don't the conservative pundits complain about all the hollywood liberals pouring money into democrat's pockets? aren't they "the rich" who will pay for the cost of healthcare?

some oppose it because they believe they will lose money
others support it because they think they will gain money
some oppose it because they do not trust their govt to do it well
others oppose it because they think the govt will do it to well, and will use it for evil purposes
i could go on with other examples
but the bottom line is that there are people with pure and sinister motives on all of the main 3 sides of the healthcare debate (no to healthcare reform vs yes w/ public option vs yes w/o public option)

there is no reason you can truly believe it is the most right, moral, and cost-effective way to let people die because of a lack of healthcare. Of all people, we have lost the courageous rescue workers of 9/11 from complications of their valiant efforts because they did not have access to healthcare! How denying these people healthcare as 'patriotic' is beyond my comprehension.

providing this basic human need,
providing what should be a basic human right,
to provide everyone with a 'good samaritan',
how could this possibly take down this nation?

[Conductor42]

I don't get a choice with Medicare. I worked for 30 years, at a modestly paying job, for the lifetime medical benefits promised. It turns out that the lifetime medical benefits require that I sign up for Medicare. Now I don't have a family doctor any more. Big choice.

Why didn't you keep your old coverage, then?

[shadowmaster]

one part you did notice,
but don't forget the bigger picture
many of the insurance companies lobbied against healthcare

some still do
some are only opposed to the public option

some will lose money but support it because they truly believe in healthcare for all. Don't the conservative pundits complain about all the hollywood liberals pouring money into democrat's pockets? aren't they "the rich" who will pay for the cost of healthcare?

some oppose it because they believe they will lose money
others support it because they think they will gain money
some oppose it because they do not trust their govt to do it well
others oppose it because they think the govt will do it to well, and will use it for evil purposes
i could go on with other examples
but the bottom line is that there are people with pure and sinister motives on all of the main 3 sides of the healthcare debate (no to healthcare reform vs yes w/ public option vs yes w/o public option)

there is no reason you can truly believe it is the most right, moral, and cost-effective way to let people die because of a lack of healthcare. Of all people, we have lost the courageous rescue workers of 9/11 from complications of their valiant efforts because they did not have access to healthcare! How denying these people healthcare as 'patriotic' is beyond my comprehension.

Indeed, providing for the common defense against wars and fires and various evil acts are the responsibilty of any mutual government. So consider what Congress has failed to do in this area.

City, state and federal officials have not acknowledged a direct link between the cancer cases and ground zero toxins. Congress has yet to approve 9/11 health legislation calling for federal financial coverage of health costs for rescue workers.

Congress is anything but patriotic.

providing this basic human need,
providing what should be a basic human right,
to provide everyone with a 'good samaritan',
how could this possibly take down this nation?

Your basic premise is that it is "denying" everyone heathcare if the government does not act to provide it.

When the Shadowmaster was young, his family was very poor. We had no insurance and we were never "denied" healthcare. It did not come from the government! Believe it or not charities work.

If social security is so noble, then why can people not be given an option to do there own thing like the legislature?. The Shadowmaster definitely could do better on his own and so could anyone else. If guidance is needed, it is available from better sources than the government.

Who should he trust? Obama? Should the Shadowmaster want more government taxes and give less to charities?


He would rather see charities be a tax write-off.

[joel]

And no, the money isn't 'just sitting there' or disappearing into deficit spending; it is being invested in the government bonds and earning interest just like any individual who invests in such bonds.

"Disappearing into deficit spending" is the same thing as "being invested in government bonds". That's what deficit spending means.