 |
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
#11
06-26-2009, 07:51 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#13
06-26-2009, 02:18 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Sixty-five percent of personal bankruptcies are due to health care costs. Meanwhile the CEOs or drug companies and insurance companies get 8 figure salaries, this is sensible?
Any country's greatest asset is its people, yet here most people are running at half power. What is the biggest adverts on TV - medications that are designed to allow people to get to work even though they are sick. I always told my staff to saty home if they were sick because I did not want them to come in and spread it around. The drug companies and health insurance companies are only interested in profits and will go to any lengths to keep them high. Several health insurers are currently being investigated for fraud. Private enterprise may have its place but that is certainly not in the health care field.
|
|
#14
06-26-2009, 03:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yep, Rob's right-as usual. That bunch that bought my company, you were pretty much EXPECTED to be there unless you were in a hospital. A doctor's excuse wasn't good enuff- you only got "half" a demerit instead of a whole one. 3 demerits & you were gone. And I don't know how many people lost everything they had to gawdam doctors & nursing homes-My granmother on my mother's side was one. We put her in a nursing home in '86 after she fell & broke her hip. Her mind never was "right" after that, either. Anyhow, she lived til '92, we paid $1600 a month for her to lay there & rot, they went thru EVERY penny she had-& started on us. And they were heartless-If their monthly fee wasn't paid on time, the "guest" was put on the front porch, at least under cover, & a phone call was placed to the family to come get the person. We didn't mind paying for my gran, & fortunately, she had enuff to where her money took care of most of it, but I objected to their inflated prices that covered 3 or 4 "indigents" who couldn't pay. I also don't think you should have to give up everything you've made all yr life to give to a glorified motel at the end of yr life like that, either.
|
|
#15
06-26-2009, 04:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
"because the pharmaceutical complanies make much larger campaign contributions than the elderly do."
That is a sign of corruption in the whole process. I guess what I am looking for is unobttainable in today's world. I am looking for people to elect officials that are not corrupt, people that will heed to the spirit of the law and Constitution, people that will take it upon themselves to care for other people locally so the Feds don't have to get involved. We as a country went off-track long ago and I wish we could get back to the way it should work. Corruption throws artificial controls into the equation and what comes out the other end is distorted and not at all what our founders had in mind. I recognize that the way things are now someone has to exert control over what should be free markets, but I don't have to like it. I do think that someone should still ask for something closer to what the founders invisioned. If no one demands betterment the only way is down. I just want to stop the slide. Rant over. 
__________________
"Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please." (Mark Twain)
|
|
#17
06-26-2009, 06:29 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
"The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed at times, with the blood of Tyrants."
|
|
#18
06-27-2009, 07:00 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
In spite of the Ten Commandments greed has not disappeared from the human equation, nor do I expect it to do so. The concept of the so-called 'free market' never took that into consideration and so we have recessions/depressions on a periodic basis.
In one of the Washington Post blogs there were a couple of real economic geni (is that plural of genius?) who spoke of the "market" as if it was some sort of non-human intelligence. I have always been rather suspicious when people refer to the 'science' of economics as I tend to equate it with tea leaf reading. When all is said and done we are the only industrialized nation (the bit that has not been shipped overseas) that does not ensure that all its citizens have access to health care. The Conservative party when it was the government of Canada instituted the Single Payer plan, not the Liberals nor the Socilaists, the Conservative Party. As near as I recall it was for the reasons I have written of, because it recognized that the people were the country's greatest natural resource, and that having them running on all eight cylinders was in the country's best interest.
|
|
#19
06-27-2009, 10:33 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Some of the issue I have with socialized health care are its not free. We, as in those who work for a living, will have to cover everyone instead of just the dead beats who insist on living off the goverments tit.
Don't get me wrong. In many ways I am in favor of it. But I am sure the plan I would come up with would share nothing in common with what our current administration, hell even the old, would come up with.
|
|
#20
06-27-2009, 02:07 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Certainly, but as it turns out the cost of policing such things ends up being more than the losses of covering such folk. That was the experience when Canada abolished the means test on the Old AGe pension. What tey did instead was tax incomes above a certaain level so that the OAS went mainly to those in need.
I would alos like to broaden the definition of deadbeat to include the Masters of the Universe from AIG along with hedge fund managers that pay tax at a lower rate than their secretaries. And just about anyone else from Wall Street. I mean to say what exactly is it that stockbrokers contribute to the GDP, or anything else for that matter.
|
 |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:10 PM.