Luminous Landscape Forum

Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: fredjeang on March 23, 2010, 03:42:03 pm

Title: Big day for the US
Post by: fredjeang on March 23, 2010, 03:42:03 pm
Congratulations for the US !
This is truly an historic date.  

Fred.

Ps: Next step is: Kyoto treaty?
or a 100% made in US dslr?
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 04:15:23 pm
It is a good start ... but the fight is long from over ... I'm excited at the legislative miracle Pelosi and Obama pulled off, but it isn't time to relax or celebrate IMO.

This legislation can be repealed ... and much of the plan requires future congresses to take additional action.

Let's not forget that in 1988, Medicare was substantially expanded to include catastrophic coverage and it was repealed within a year.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: vjbelle on March 23, 2010, 05:20:43 pm
Quote from: fredjeang
Congratulations for the US !
This is truly an historic date.  

Fred.

Ps: Next step is: Kyoto treaty?
or a 100% made in US dslr?
Would you mind telling me what this has to do with Photography or this site??? I think that political posts such as this should be banned from LL.  There are many other places to post controversial political opinions.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 05:24:25 pm
Quote from: vjbelle
Would you mind telling me what this has to do with Photography or this site??? I think that political posts such as this should be banned from LL.  There are many other places to post controversial political opinions.
Umm ... go look at the "What's New" part of the main page ...

Michael chose to comment on this.

Title: Big day for the US
Post by: thebatman on March 23, 2010, 05:30:09 pm
Hopefully Michael and others will post similar congratulations 20 years from now when the US declares bankruptcy.  But admittedly I am biased: a Canadian who left for the USA, and now finds that the US is turning into Canada!  Can't win.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: jasonrandolph on March 23, 2010, 05:31:09 pm
I'm amazed at how willing people are to give up their liberty and their privacy in order to let the government be in charge of their well-being.  Name one thing (other than national defense) that the government does better than the private sector.

If that's not enough to dissuade you from the idea of gov't-run health care, how about a case study?  As a disabled veteran, I've personally experienced government-run health care.  Imagine this (and this has personally happened to me):  You need an appointment with your primary care provider.  You call them for an appointment and they tell you they will inform on a later date you when your appointment is scheduled.  You wait.  And wait.  You call them and ask about your appointment request, and they say THEY will "inform" YOU.  A few weeks (actually about 6 weeks), you receive a letter in the mail telling you that your appointment is scheduled for two days ago.  You call them and tell them that you missed your appointment because the notification was received after the appointment had come and gone.  They are irritated because your file says you missed your appointment, so they reschedule you for an appointment for two months later.  In the meantime, you have been waiting 5 months to see your doctor, and your condition hasn't improved.  What a glorious system.  If they treat veterans that way, imagine how they'll treat the general public.

No one has died from lack of gov't health care.  To say otherwise is simply false.  All you have to do is go the the ER.  By law, they are not allowed to turn anyone away.  Yes, we do need to reform health care, namely, the way patients are allowed to sue a doctor out of house & home for the slightest mistake.  Or how about opening health insurance up to some interstate competition?  

Sorry to get up on the soapbox, but I know what's coming, and all I have to say is: be careful what you wish for.  You might just get it.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 05:33:04 pm
Quote from: thebatman
Hopefully Michael and others will post similar congratulations 20 years from now when the US declares bankruptcy.  But admittedly I am biased: a Canadian who left for the USA, and now finds that the US is turning into Canada!  Can't win.

Given that we already provide universal health care in a VERY expensive manner, I don't see how paying for it in a more sensible way could possibly bankrupt us.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see ...

Title: Big day for the US
Post by: perl_monger on March 23, 2010, 05:38:21 pm
Is this a good joke? Is Michael that unaware? Has he or any of you bothered to read any of the 2,600 page bill?

The US "provide its citizens with health care"? What have I been missing? I've lived in the US since birth - for 51 years - and I don't recall not having health care. The US in fact provides the best health care in the world - well, it did, until the government gets hold of it. That's why US hospitals along the Canadian border do such a booming business - providing health care or providing it a level of quality that Canada can't or won't provide.

"Universal" health care is great - until you get sick. Then you're at the mercy of a political process or some bureaucrat.

Is the current system perfect? No. No system is. But it was a market based system, and market based systems have a way of working themselves out. That's why Michael and everyone else on this forum uses product that is market based and not single sourced by some government.

And I don't buy the "rest of the developed world" crap either. The US is different and wants to be different. That's why the overwhelming majority of the population opposes the bill, why attorneys general of 37 states have or will sue on constitutional grounds, why there will be political hell to pay for it, and why this current crop of corruptocrats are finished.


Title: Big day for the US
Post by: thebatman on March 23, 2010, 05:39:52 pm
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Given that we already provide universal health care in a VERY expensive manner, I don't see how paying for it in a more sensible way could possibly bankrupt us.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see ...

I guess so, but I'd rather not have to tell my kids, "oops, sorry about that, we were all wrong and now you'll be paying for it for the rest of your life".  It's $1 trillion dollars of which at least 2/3 is unfunded, because (1) in the first 10 years it's 6 years of benefits but 10 years of taxes, to fudge the real cost, and (2) another 1/3 of the cost is funded via medicare cuts to doctors which we know congress will never pass.

And Jason - sounds like Canadian health care to me! My father in law just had a big heart attack and waited 10 weeks for sextuple (yep, six) bypass surgery, which down here he would have had same day.  Oh well, perhaps I will go produce a photo essay of all the government-run-or-regulated things that work so well: the post office, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, airlines, the auto industry, the IRS, the DMV.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: ckimmerle on March 23, 2010, 05:46:28 pm
Quote from: perl_monger
I've lived in the US since birth - for 51 years - and I don't recall not having health care.

I'm sure the fact that YOU have insurance makes the tens of millions that do not feel much better. Thank you for putting that into perspective.

BTW, this thread outta be locked....right....now!
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: jasonrandolph on March 23, 2010, 05:47:27 pm
Quote from: thebatman
I guess so, but I'd rather not have to tell my kids, "oops, sorry about that, we were all wrong and now you'll be paying for it for the rest of your life".  It's $1 trillion dollars of which at least 2/3 is unfunded, because (1) in the first 10 years it's 6 years of benefits but 10 years of taxes, to fudge the real cost, and (2) another 1/3 of the cost is funded via medicare cuts to doctors which we know congress will never pass.

And Jason - sounds like Canadian health care to me! My father in law just had a big heart attack and waited 10 weeks for sextuple (yep, six) bypass surgery, which down here he would have had same day.  Oh well, perhaps I will go produce a photo essay of all the government-run-or-regulated things that work so well: the post office, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, airlines, the auto industry, the IRS, the DMV.

Hmm, seems like the more regulations that govern a department, the less efficient it's run.  Maybe there's an inversely proportional relationship between the two.  I'm telling you, people are going to be screaming to go back to the old system when they see how poorly-run the system will be.  And how many government departments have ever been shuttered?  We need to stop them NOW.

By the way, I hope your father-in-law makes it through this.  Tell him to come down here while there's still time.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: jasonrandolph on March 23, 2010, 05:51:51 pm
Quote from: ckimmerle
I'm sure the fact that YOU have insurance makes the tens of millions that do not feel much better. Thank you for putting that into perspective.

He said health CARE, not health INSURANCE.  And everyone has access to health care in the current system.  Those of us who have insurance pay for it.

As an interesting aside, I have free medical care through the VA because of my service-connected disabilities.  But I choose to have private insurance because of the "quality" of gov't-provided care.  I'm telling you, you DO NOT want this.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: PierreVandevenne on March 23, 2010, 05:59:10 pm
I've seen so many nice places on the Net damaged by this red hot issue. I also believe this topic should be closed asap!
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: buckshot on March 23, 2010, 06:02:08 pm
Quote from: jasonrandolph
He said health CARE, not health INSURANCE.  And everyone has access to health care in the current system.  Those of us who have insurance pay for it.

As an interesting aside, I have free medical care through the VA because of my service-connected disabilities.  But I choose to have private insurance because of the "quality" of gov't-provided care.  I'm telling you, you DO NOT want this.

I've experienced govt-health care in Canada, the UK and France and in every instance it was first class and didn't cost me a penny. Sure, you pay for the service through your taxes, but so what - proportionally it's far cheaper than private medical insurance (and they don't turn you down) - and since they've got to spend your money on something, why not health care? Sure beats wasting it on stealth fighters and space-based weapons systems that's for sure.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 06:06:29 pm
Quote from: thebatman
I guess so, but I'd rather not have to tell my kids, "oops, sorry about that, we were all wrong and now you'll be paying for it for the rest of your life".  It's $1 trillion dollars ...

Please ... do you honestly believe that the wealthiest country in the world can't afford to provide decent health care to its population?

Nonsense.

A trillion dollars is only 7% of annual income ... that's a big number, but we are a HUGE country with a nearly $15 trillion economy.

We can afford it.  Don't believe ANYONE who says otherwise ... they are either ignorant of the facts to pursuing a different agenda.

You can oppose this ... but not because we can't afford it ... we can't afford NOT to do this.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: tokengirl on March 23, 2010, 06:18:14 pm
Quote from: jasonrandolph
I'm amazed at how willing people are to give up their liberty and their privacy in order to let the government be in charge of their well-being.  Name one thing (other than national defense) that the government does better than the private sector.

If that's not enough to dissuade you from the idea of gov't-run health care, how about a case study?  As a disabled veteran, I've personally experienced government-run health care.  Imagine this (and this has personally happened to me):  You need an appointment with your primary care provider.  You call them for an appointment and they tell you they will inform on a later date you when your appointment is scheduled.  You wait.  And wait.  You call them and ask about your appointment request, and they say THEY will "inform" YOU.  A few weeks (actually about 6 weeks), you receive a letter in the mail telling you that your appointment is scheduled for two days ago.  You call them and tell them that you missed your appointment because the notification was received after the appointment had come and gone.  They are irritated because your file says you missed your appointment, so they reschedule you for an appointment for two months later.  In the meantime, you have been waiting 5 months to see your doctor, and your condition hasn't improved.  What a glorious system.  If they treat veterans that way, imagine how they'll treat the general public.

Sorry to hear the VA facility you frequent is run so crappily.  The one here in Miami is AMAZINGLY efficient.  My Better Half has never waited 6 weeks for an appointment, or even close to it.  He has never received a letter about an upcoming appointment after the fact, and they have an automated machine that calls us two days before the appointment to remind us.  His prescriptions are filled in a timely manner, and prescription refills are done over the phone and mailed to the house.  All his medical records are computerized (including any prescriptions) and every doctor that sees him looks at his entire record on the screen right there in front of him so they know everything that's going on with him.  I wish everyone had access to this kind of service.

My Better Half is a hard-core right-wing tinfoil hat-wearing Rush Lumpbutt-listening conspiracy theorist tea-bagger.  But I sure haven't heard him complain about HIS "government-run healthcare".
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: fredjeang on March 23, 2010, 06:20:45 pm
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Please ... do you honestly believe that the wealthiest country in the world can't afford to provide decent health care to its population?

Nonsense.

A trillion dollars is only 7% of annual income ... that's a big number, but we are a HUGE country with a nearly $15 trillion economy.

We can afford it.  Don't believe ANYONE who says otherwise ... they are either ignorant of the facts to pursuing a different agenda.

You can oppose this ... but not because we can't afford it ... we can't afford NOT to do this.
I totally agree Jeremy.

USA was the only place of the richest contry in the world that did not provide this basic service for free!
Maybe Germany or France etc...are third world nation?

I hear some comments saying that USA is the most powerfull country because it did not have to pay this kind of things...
Wrong. USA is the richest country in the world because it won the world war, and because it has a huge territory and great ressources with a wondefull machinery.
Lets see then if with full health care insurance coverage, Europe or even China are not soon at the same level?
Healph care has nothing to do with how rich a country is, but a lot to do with how decent a country is.

Fred.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: wthomphoto on March 23, 2010, 06:22:32 pm
Quote from: jasonrandolph
I'm amazed at how willing people are to give up their liberty and their privacy in order to let the government be in charge of their well-being.  Name one thing (other than national defense) that the government does better than the private sector.

If that's not enough to dissuade you from the idea of gov't-run health care, how about a case study?  As a disabled veteran, I've personally experienced government-run health care.  Imagine this (and this has personally happened to me):  You need an appointment with your primary care provider.  You call them for an appointment and they tell you they will inform on a later date you when your appointment is scheduled.  You wait.  And wait.  You call them and ask about your appointment request, and they say THEY will "inform" YOU.  A few weeks (actually about 6 weeks), you receive a letter in the mail telling you that your appointment is scheduled for two days ago.  You call them and tell them that you missed your appointment because the notification was received after the appointment had come and gone.  They are irritated because your file says you missed your appointment, so they reschedule you for an appointment for two months later.  In the meantime, you have been waiting 5 months to see your doctor, and your condition hasn't improved.  What a glorious system.  If they treat veterans that way, imagine how they'll treat the general public.

No one has died from lack of gov't health care.  To say otherwise is simply false.  All you have to do is go the the ER.  By law, they are not allowed to turn anyone away.  Yes, we do need to reform health care, namely, the way patients are allowed to sue a doctor out of house & home for the slightest mistake.  Or how about opening health insurance up to some interstate competition?  

Sorry to get up on the soapbox, but I know what's coming, and all I have to say is: be careful what you wish for.  You might just get it.
Medicare sure works for me.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: fredjeang on March 23, 2010, 06:23:38 pm
Quote from: vjbelle
Would you mind telling me what this has to do with Photography or this site??? I think that political posts such as this should be banned from LL.  There are many other places to post controversial political opinions.
Hey, you would have noticed that I also made a call for a 100% US camera dslr.  
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 23, 2010, 06:25:43 pm
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Please ... do you honestly believe that the wealthiest country in the world can't afford to provide decent health care to its population?

Nonsense.

A trillion dollars is only 7% of annual income ... that's a big number, but we are a HUGE country with a nearly $15 trillion economy.

We can afford it.  Don't believe ANYONE who says otherwise ... they are either ignorant of the facts to pursuing a different agenda.

You can oppose this ... but not because we can't afford it ... we can't afford NOT to do this.
Exactly. I find it amusing (though sickeningly so) how those who complain about the cost of the health care reform do not complain about gazillions of dollars per second that have been spent on a war of choice.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: perl_monger on March 23, 2010, 06:33:22 pm
All the emotional discussion on here has been about health care in general, not THIS PARTICULAR HEALTH CARE BILL. All the snivelling, whining, "why can't the US be like the rest of us" talk, no one addresses the bill or the shady politics behind it. Bribery, the nationalization of the student loan program, kickbacks to interested parties, all have nothing to do with health care. But they sure do have everything to do with this bill.

Ends justifying the means? Whatever. The majority of Americans don't want it, and hopefully it gets flushed down the toilet real soon now.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: jasonrandolph on March 23, 2010, 06:47:44 pm
Quote from: perl_monger
All the emotional discussion on here has been about health care in general, not THIS PARTICULAR HEALTH CARE BILL. All the snivelling, whining, "why can't the US be like the rest of us" talk, no one addresses the bill or the shady politics behind it. Bribery, the nationalization of the student loan program, kickbacks to interested parties, all have nothing to do with health care. But they sure do have everything to do with this bill.

Ends justifying the means? Whatever. The majority of Americans don't want it, and hopefully it gets flushed down the toilet real soon now.
I'm 100 percent with you Perl.  This is corruption in the name of caring.  But there IS a connection between nationalization of student loans and gov't-run health care: government control.  The bill isn't about health care OR student loans.  It's purely a power grab by the federal government.  That's why 14 states are suing the feds already.  Hopefully the other 36 will follow suit.  The states have the power to provide health care by the Tenth Amendment, not the federal government.  The states and the people are going to ram this bill down Obama/Reid/Pelosi's collective throat before all this is done.  And hopefully we'll do it Chicago-style.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: ErikKaffehr on March 23, 2010, 07:01:01 pm
Hi,

I'm not a US taxpayer and when I travel to US I have a health insurance policy, so I'm definitively an outsider. On the other I'd suggest that a decent level of health care is, or should be, a basic right for everyone in a wealthy and developed country.

I'd also suggest that Michael Reichmann who has initiated, owns and manages this forum can discuss whatever issues he wants. Obviously, this issue is important to him.

This forums have always been open and tolerant, let's keep up with that good tradition!


Best regards
Erik

Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 23, 2010, 07:02:06 pm
Quote from: jasonrandolph
... The states and the people are going to ram this bill down Obama/Reid/Pelosi's collective throat before all this is done.  And hopefully we'll do it Chicago-style.
And which Chicago style would that be? Al Capone's?
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 07:04:15 pm
Quote from: perl_monger
The majority of Americans don't want it, and hopefully it gets flushed down the toilet real soon now.
USA Today/Gallup Poll from yesterday ...

"As you may know, yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that restructures the nation's health care system. All in all, do you think it is a good thing or a bad thing that Congress passed this bill?"

Good Thing - 49%
Bad Thing - 40%
Unsure - 11%
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: fredjeang on March 23, 2010, 07:09:31 pm
oh oh...it smells that it could be a thread that will be closed very soon.  

Be happy! What's wrong? USA will be like Canada, so you won't hear these complains and comparaisons any more.
The other rich countries won't be able to use this argument any more when it comes to cheap anti-usa position etc..
and you'll have more social fairness and social peace. 100% positive for USA.

Now, it seems that my 100% US dslr does not interest anybody  

Fred.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: ndevlin on March 23, 2010, 07:11:28 pm
Photography, not least in in America, has a long and honourable tradition of bringing casues of social injustice to light. The visual truth has been a powerful force for social change in the last century.

What is truly sad and frightening, as graphically illustrated by this thread, is that,200 years after pioneering modern democracy, America has lost the ability to conduct a civil, intelligent, informed debate on any issue of public policy.  Propaganists demagogues (who masquerade as 'news' sources) have reduced the level of discussion to such a low level of lies and inane untruths, build upon the narrative of fear and threat which was fed to the nation by its central government for almost a decade, that one wonders how long it will be before the rancour simply descends into violence.  Good thing Americans aren't heavily armed or anything.

When I was young, there was often talk of how Canada would simply, inevitably become part of the US because we were so similar. Now, I look south and see a land riven by fear, hate, religious extremism, and institutionalized corporate theivery passed-off as a 'freedom from govt control',  unable even to have a civil conversation about how to achieve minimal levels of compassionate medical care for one another.  If this keeps up, I wouldn't be surprised to see America fracture into a number of smaller, poor,violent, and globally insignificant pieces within my lifetime.  

So sad.

- N.


ps. you might recall that Michael has more than a passing interest in the subject of US health-care, having held a massive print-sale on this site to raise funds to pay for medical care for a family friend with a grave illness, who had exhausted her private insurance. It's all a great government take-over, until it's your mother or sister who needs chemotherapy.....
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 07:14:45 pm
Quote from: fredjeang
USA will be like Canada

Actually, the plan is nothing like the Canadian system - I wish it were.

Personally, I think the market has failed us here and would gladly support a single-payer system.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: DarkPenguin on March 23, 2010, 07:19:17 pm
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Actually, the plan is nothing like the Canadian system - I wish it were.

Personally, I think the market has failed us here and would gladly support a single-payer system.

Me too.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: fredjeang on March 23, 2010, 07:19:39 pm
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Actually, the plan is nothing like the Canadian system - I wish it were.

Personally, I think the market has failed us here and would gladly support a single-payer system.
Really Jeremy? I thought it was in a way similar. Well...
So I understand even less why all this passion and agitation against it if it will be just an approximation?    

Fred.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: John.Murray on March 23, 2010, 07:31:24 pm
Quote
What is truly sad and frightening, as graphically illustrated by this thread, is that,200 years after pioneering modern democracy, America has lost the ability to conduct a civil, intelligent, informed debate on any issue of public policy. Propaganists demagogues (who masquerade as 'news' sources) have reduced the level of discussion to such a low level of lies and inane untruths, build upon the narrative of fear and threat which was fed to the nation by its central government for almost a decade, that one wonders how long it will be before the rancour simply descends into violence. Good thing Americans aren't heavily armed or anything.

Ever read about the constitutional convention?  Technology back then was just as mis-used.....

As far as arms... we are
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 07:32:55 pm
Quote from: fredjeang
Really Jeremy? I thought it was in a way similar. Well...
So I understand even less why all this passion and agitation against it if it will be just an approximation?    

Fred.

Amazing, right?  What has been proposed so far is nothing like the Canadian system - although many opponents of the plan believe that to be the case.

If you want to oppose the plan because it doesn't include tort reform or because it doesn't allow for a national insurance market then let's talk about real issues.

But if you are going to bitch about it being too expensive or too 'socialist', you've been played ... badly ...
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: fredjeang on March 23, 2010, 07:37:30 pm
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
If you want to oppose the plan because it doesn't include tort reform or because it doesn't allow for a national insurance market then let's talk about real issues.

But if you are going to bitch about it being too expensive or too 'socialist', you've been played ... badly ...
Absolutly.
Agree 100%

Fred.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: perl_monger on March 23, 2010, 07:45:56 pm
I'm sorry if some members think this discussion has gotten out of hand. There are strong opinions, but that doesn't mean that things are out of hand - just strong opinions. I apologize if anything that I have said was disrespectful. I find the bill distasteful, but not you guys.

On March 22, a CNN poll was released which showed that 59% of Americans opposed the bill. A Gallop poll released today shows that 49% think it is good. Polling methodology or actual results?

I am sympathetic to the story of and am grateful to Michael for having a print sale in support of a friend in need. There are stories and anecdotes on both sides of this argument - I work for a UK company and read the newspaper accounts of neglected patients, denied care, shortages, how bureaucrats outnumber doctors 2:1, and the like. This comes from UK papers, not US. And I know people in Buffalo, NY, who work in hospitals that do a very good business from Canadians seeking care here. Didn't Danny Williams choose to come to the US for heart surgery - 'my heart, my choice'?

To me, the US has always been the "out" for other countries because of the system we had in place. If you didn't like or were denied service, you could always come to the US. The size of and the fact that the US had a market based system was incentive for companies to develop product that found its way to the rest of the world. A monopoly in this regard? No. A significant, maybe the most significant contributor? Yes.

The solution arrived at is not the only solution. My beef with it has been what is in the bill, and how it was passed. The ramifications are not yet known. Will more people have insurance coverage? Yes. Will care improve? Who knows. Will scarcity and rationing, historically a consequence of government control, at least in this country be the result? Will the end result be a more humane system or less of one? I guess we will find out. But if it's not - will there be a way back? These are the questions that haunt me. Like Denny Williams, will we have a choice, or will it be like so many government provided services here?
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: azmike on March 23, 2010, 08:03:57 pm
Thank you Michael.

To my fellow Americans:  we could take the civility and thoughtful tone of Michael Reichmann's words as an example of how to communicate.  Demagoguery and rancor will not help us deal with the big challenges we face.


Mike Coffey
Prescott, AZ
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 08:23:32 pm
Ronald Reagan, 1961, speaking out against Medicare ... "one of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children, and our children's children, what it once was like in America when men were free."

Hmmmm ... Medicare is pretty popular ... Reagan was just plain wrong ... hmmm ... sounds a lot like these guys ... history will be the judge ...

Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio: "We are about 24 hours from Armageddon. … This health care bill will ruin our country."

U.S. Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif.: "Today we are turning back the clock. For most of the 21st century, people fled the ghosts of communist dictators and … with passage of this bill, they will haunt Americans for generations. Your multitrillion-dollar health care bill continues the failed Soviet socialist experiment. It gives the federal government absolute control over health care in America. … Today Democrats in this House will finally lay the cornerstone of their socialist utopia on the backs of the American people."

U.S. Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.: "The consequences of this bill will be frightening and horrible."

Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele: "(House) Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi ... your actions are despicable, and you and your allies will be held accountable for them."

U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah: "It's the Europeanization of America, and that's the worst thing that could possibly happen to our country."

House Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence (Indiana): "The American people want to face our challenges in health care with more freedom, not more government, and this really is about freedom. The more I think about this debate, the more I think about what Ronald Reagan said (about Medicare in the 1960s). He said then and now, it's about whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far distant capital can plan our lives better than we can plan them ourselves."
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: thebatman on March 23, 2010, 08:39:47 pm
I think we can all agree that we aren't going to settle this on a photo forum, but I'm puzzled by those asking for this thread to be locked.  Seems to me the discussion has been very civil, especially considering the passions this issue arouses.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: thebatman on March 23, 2010, 08:50:15 pm
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Please ... do you honestly believe that the wealthiest country in the world can't afford to provide decent health care to its population?

Nonsense.

A trillion dollars is only 7% of annual income ... that's a big number, but we are a HUGE country with a nearly $15 trillion economy.

We can afford it.  Don't believe ANYONE who says otherwise ... they are either ignorant of the facts to pursuing a different agenda.

You can oppose this ... but not because we can't afford it ... we can't afford NOT to do this.

Yes, I honestly believe we cannot afford it.  Not even close.  I could go on forever, but there are two main reasons.  One, as I stated before, is that we cannot even pay for this first 10 years of the program.  It is not funded.  It will not be funded.  It will greatly add to the deficit.  Therefore QED, we cannot afford it because we ARE not affording it.  Two, maybe if it was health care alone we could manage.  But when you add the tremendous deficits already looming in social security, medicare and medicaid, plus the million-plus tax breaks for everything from alligator farms to ethanol cars, it very quickly becomes more than even this great country can afford.  With social security and medicare alone, we were already facing $70 TRILLION unfunded already, even before you add this bill.  You don't have to believe me, just google "social security and medicare unfunded liability".

And in that respect Reagan was right - medicare is/was unsustainable.  It just takes 30-40 years to show.  Well, it's showing now.  Buckle up for the next few decades.  In the face of all of these numbers, simply saying "we can't afford not to do it" not only doesn't make sense, it's downright irresponsible.  But sadly representative of the arguments for the bill.

And Slobodan, I think you jumped the gun.  Just because someone opposes this spending doesn't mean they wanted to fund the war.  Someone could easily be opposed to both.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 23, 2010, 09:23:36 pm
Opponents of the health care reform often frame it as a (big) government vs. private sector/business/free markets. Proponents, on the other hand, cite extraordinary profits in the medical insurance and pharmaceutical sectors (presumably at the expense of those whose treatment was denied by insurance).

And this is where the debate gets heated very quickly, as it becomes emotional, hitting all the buttons where the basic sense of fairness is: huge profits vs. people being denied treatment or coverage, going bankrupt, etc. (bear with me, I am not claiming this is true or taking sides here, just describing). What then follows is an endless chain of anecdotal evidence on both sides: glaring examples of wrongs by either system (i.e., Canadian/European vs. American). And as in religious debates, nothing ever gets resolved, as strong beliefs and emotions rule.

Yet, there is an alternative (to the debate driven by emotions and beliefs). Given that I am, in general, a proponent of free markets, this is how, in my humble opinion, truly free markets would solve this: any industry with extraordinary profits would attract newcomers, increasing competition and ultimately decreasing prices and thus profits to the level of normal ones (or what economists call "zero economic profit").

So, the real issue here is not only about social justice, basic fairness, should-I-save-my-finger-or-feed-my-kids dilemmas, etc. The real questions is then : why isn't there a free(er) market for medical insurance and pharmaceuticals? What is preventing more competition? True, pharmaceuticals have huge barriers to entry (i.e., huge critical mass necessary for research). However, if insurance companies are racking enormous profits up, why aren't new insurance companies entering the fray?

And that is where the proper role of government should be: ensuring free markets. Given that Republicans like to portray themselves as champions of business and free markets, the questions is why didn't they open the health care markets to more competition in the eight years of unquestionable power? Had they done that, there would be much less need for a direct government intervention, the likes of which we are supposedly facing now.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: michael on March 23, 2010, 09:28:32 pm
Continue to keep this thread civil and I'll keep it open. There's nothing wrong with a civil discourse by intellegent people, even when it gets a bit heated.

As for the health bill itself, as much as I am pleased to see it passed, I believe it to be a very poor bill, and from what I can gather much more expensive and over complicated than it likely should have been if a single payer approach had been acceptable, as it in most other countries.

But, it's a start, and hopefully over time, once the rancor has subsided, it can be finessed into a viable public system that the country can afford, and which the people deserve.


Michael
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 23, 2010, 09:41:10 pm
Quote from: thebatman
... And Slobodan, I think you jumped the gun.  Just because someone opposes this spending doesn't mean they wanted to fund the war.  Someone could easily be opposed to both.
Undeniably true, agreed.

However, one can't help noticing much less oppositions to funding the war among the same constituency that so vehemently opposes the health care reform (presumably the right-leaning one). Opposition to war comes mostly from the left-leaning constituency, though on different grounds than fiscal. My amusement comes from the fact that those fiscal conservatives were nowhere to be heard when their governemnt went from a surplus to a record deficit, and when their government passed the biggest military budget in human history... the same fiscal conservatives never asked then "can we afford it?".
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: REZPhotos on March 23, 2010, 09:56:51 pm
Quote
If that's not enough to dissuade you from the idea of gov't-run health care, how about a case study?  ... If they treat veterans that way, imagine how they'll treat the general public.
I live in the US and have a Government-run plan.  It's called Medicare.  Works just great.
Quote
No one has died from lack of gov't health care.  To say otherwise is simply false.  All you have to do is go the the ER.  By law, they are not allowed to turn anyone away.

Who do you think pays for the care in the ER?  Sorry but it's the Government.



Title: Big day for the US
Post by: thewanderer on March 23, 2010, 10:02:54 pm
You europeans should come on over and help us pay for it.

You are uninformed and ignorant.  Wealth of country has nothing to do with whether we should be picking up tabs on those who dont buy insurance..

Its a losing argument to expect supporters of this fiasco to understand that we cant continue these give away programs.  It just cant sustain itself.. Shame your maths skills are so limited.

And to the cannucks, suggesting that we have done somehting wonderful, when are yall gonna get rid of the picutre of the english queen on your money,

Still paying a  homage to britain and just cant get off the tit.

You are right, you should stay out of american politics, unless you are willing to put up some of the money to pay for all the cost of this.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 23, 2010, 10:14:36 pm
From a slightly different angle: has anyone noticed that the stock market is UP almost 2% in the last two days (i.e., after the passage of the bill)? If anything, those guys should have been sensitive to the "doom & gloom" scenarios stemming from the healthcare bill.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 23, 2010, 10:21:53 pm
Quote from: thewanderer
... when are yall gonna get rid of the picutre of the english queen on your money...
I can not speak for Canadians (I presume it has something to do with tradition, however), but I will give it a try: at about the same time we get rid of the secretive mystical symbols of Freemasonry from our money
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 10:28:01 pm
Quote from: thebatman
Yes, I honestly believe we cannot afford it.  Not even close.

As a society, whether privately or publicly, we can most definitely afford to provide health care for ourselves ... in fact, we seem to be able to afford to pay $1.30 for $1.00 worth of outcome.

What you seem to fail to understand is that we ALREADY provide universal health care ... just not universal insurance.

If we were to provide universal care through a universal coverage system, it would cost less in total over the long-run than what we are doing now.

We can continue on the course we are on ... and end up spending 30% of our national income on providing good care for 90% of the country and send the other 10% to the emergency room when they have a cold that turns into bronchitis ... or we can do something about it and get costs under control and provide basic coverage for all our citizens.

You are correct that the true economic liability of our government entitlements is in the 10s of trillions.

So what?  We are indebted, but not overly so.  We can afford these liabilities ... you don't have to look farther that the market for US Treasuries to see that.

The US Government pays 3.7% ... do you really think the savers of the world would only demand 3.7% for 10 years if we can't afford our liabilities?  Money talks ... BS wallks ... and that money is talking loud and clear.  

The bond market didn't blink when this passed ... if you were right, Treasuries would have TANKED.

What do you pay to borrow unsecured for 10 years?

Quote from: thebatman
And in that respect Reagan was right - medicare is/was unsustainable.

It is not unsustainable ... and it is MUCH more efficient than the private market.  Medicare is the model for the single payer system we need.


Title: Big day for the US
Post by: jasonrandolph on March 23, 2010, 10:28:22 pm
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Hmmmm ... Medicare is pretty popular

Medicare is popular because everyone pays into it, yet it's INSOLVENT!  So is Social Security!  Just like the United States!  How can you say we can afford it when we can't pay our bills as it is?  China and Japan are closing the spigot of money coming in and buying up our bonds because they see what's coming.  We are nearly bankrupt, and frankly, whether we do nationalized healthcare or not, we're going to have an economic collapse.  This is just one more nail in the coffin.

But no one dares to answer the question of constitutionality because the Tenth Amendment reserves powers not granted to the federal government specifically to the states and to the people.  Don't like it?  Amend the Constitution.  But that's inconvenient because it requires supermajorities and ratification by the states, and progressives know that it would fail.

And, how do you explain away the nationalization of student loans that was included in a bill supposedly about healthcare?  I'd like to see someone connect the dots on THAT one.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: jasonrandolph on March 23, 2010, 10:37:00 pm
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
So what?  We are indebted, but not overly so.  We can afford these liabilities ... you don't have to look farther that the market for US Treasuries to see that.

The US Government pays 3.7% ... do you really think the savers of the world would only demand 3.7% for 10 years if we can't afford our liabilities?  .

What is your definition of unsustainable?  We are about to lose our AAA bond rating BECAUSE it's unsustainable.  When that happens, there goes the 3.7%.  And what do you think will happen when the tax increases go into effect?  We're talking a double-dip recession at best, or a new depression.  A basic economics class will teach you that.  We're printing money so fast that we're making inflation a foregone conclusion.  All that's holding it at bay is China buying up our debt, but that's slowing down as of January of this year.  We're already doomed.  We cannot afford to make it any worse.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: ckimmerle on March 23, 2010, 10:40:32 pm
Quote from: jasonrandolph
And, how do you explain away the nationalization of student loans that was included in a bill supposedly about healthcare?  I'd like to see someone connect the dots on THAT one.

Not sure exactly why it was attached to the health care bill, but it does make a lot of sense. Student loans are big business for banks who, of course, profit from the accrued interest. The trouble is that banks earn this money, hundreds of millions of dollars annually, without taking ANY risks as these loans are insured by the federal government. It's free money for them.

Does it make good economic sense to back for-profit loans taxpayer dollars? By skipping the middle man (banks) loans may actually get less expensive and the revenue, if done correctly, can help fund the program.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: jasonrandolph on March 23, 2010, 10:45:26 pm
Quote from: ckimmerle
Not sure exactly why it was attached to the health care bill, but it does make a lot of sense. Student loans are big business for banks who, of course, profit from the accrued interest. The trouble is that banks earn this money, hundreds of millions of dollars annually, without taking ANY risks as these loans are insured by the federal government. It's free money for them.

Does it make good economic sense to back for-profit loans taxpayer dollars? By skipping the middle man (banks) loans may actually get less expensive and the revenue, if done correctly, can help fund the program.

...and one more industry gets taken over by the federal government.  How can anyone reasonably deny that this isn't a move toward socialism?  You don't have to be a genius to see that it was done so that it would get pushed through without debate by the same people who voted for health care.  And now Sallie Mae will be run by the same people who ran Fannie and Freddie into the ground.  Brilliant.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 10:45:34 pm
Quote from: jasonrandolph
Medicare is popular because everyone pays into it, yet it's INSOLVENT!  So is Social Security!  Just like the United States!


Medicare is popular because it cares for our elderly ... and does so well and efficiently.

It is not "insolvent" ... nor is Social Security ... nor is the US.

Medicare and SS are pay-as-you-go ... and it is no surprise that the funding formula and mechanism needs adjustment over time.

Quote from: jasonrandolph
How can you say we can afford it when we can't pay our bills as it is?  China and Japan are closing the spigot of money coming in and buying up our bonds because they see what's coming.  We are nearly bankrupt, and frankly, whether we do nationalized healthcare or not, we're going to have an economic collapse.  This is just one more nail in the coffin.

That's just nonsense ... You're being hysterical.  We are an extremely wealthy nation swimming in capital.  What we lack is leadership.

We pay our bills and are in no danger of "collapse".  Nobody is "closing the spigot" ...

Jason ... stop watching so much Fox News ... it ain't fair and balanced ...
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 10:46:38 pm
Quote from: jasonrandolph
And now Sallie Mae will be run by the same people who ran Fannie and Freddie into the ground.  Brilliant.

Dude ... you aren't armed with facts ...

Who ran Freddie and Fannie?
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: jasonrandolph on March 23, 2010, 10:50:46 pm
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Medicare is popular because it cares for our elderly ... and does so well and efficiently.

It is not "insolvent" ... nor is Social Security ... nor is the US.

Medicare and SS are pay-as-you-go ... and it is no surprise that the funding formula and mechanism needs adjustment over time.



That's just nonsense ... You're being hysterical.  We are an extremely wealthy nation swimming in capital.  What we lack is leadership.

We pay our bills and are in no danger of "collapse".  Nobody is "closing the spigot" ...

Jason ... stop watching so much Fox News ... it ain't fair and balanced ...

Jeremy, you really need to read the news, and I'm not talking about Fox News.  Read the European papers.  It was reported in February that the Chinese and Japanese are cutting back on buying our bonds.  And if you think Social Security and Medicare funds are put aside and not used for anything else, then you are ignorant of your history.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 10:52:30 pm
Quote from: jasonrandolph
...and one more industry gets taken over by the federal government.  How can anyone reasonably deny that this isn't a move toward socialism?  You don't have to be a genius to see that it was done so that it would get pushed through without debate by the same people who voted for health care.  And now Sallie Mae will be run by the same people who ran Fannie and Freddie into the ground.  Brilliant.

Sallie Mae took cheap money from THE GOVERNMENT, made loans and kept the interest.

Sallie Mae was NOT a free market institution ... it was a SOCIALLY SUBSIDIZED operation.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were private corporations ... they were not government agencies ...


Title: Big day for the US
Post by: trops on March 23, 2010, 10:59:26 pm
While the cost issues and the types of techniques used to get this bill passed are extremely important, the larger and more significant issue for many Americans who are opposed to the bill is mainly a philosophical one. And whether it is characterized as big government versus small government or individual liberties versus government control of the individual, the issue has more to do with preserving America's great experiment - namely the idea that it is the individual and not the state that is all important. In all of history, that never happened before.  Of course, we are far removed from that original start, and quite honestly it is partly due to the fact that most people, once they are provided with an "entitlement" are loath to give it up.  As for the claim that health care or even education or a nice home is a right -- rights are not something that the government grants to the individual but rather stem from the fact of our very human nature.  And one guideline to distinguishing those unalienable rights from bogus rights is this: you can't claim as a right something that violates another's rights. And rights has a very specific meaning as described in the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. Everyone recognizes that you can't steal from another because you would be depriving that person of his/her right to his/her property. But if the government forces one to give up "property" so that it can give it to someone else, lots of folks don't seem to see anything wrong with that. So while most of us would agree that it would be a wonderful thing for everyone to have a nice house, or a nice car, or a great job, etc. once one realizes that if that happens by taking from others by force (which the government can do), then that just cannot be defined as a right.  There are no easy answers here, but the principle of individual liberty versus statism is very clear.  And to those who claim this philosophy leads to totally self absorbed and uncaring people - consider that Americans voluntarily donate the largest amounts to charities and aid to people in need of any people on the planet.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 10:59:37 pm
Quote from: jasonrandolph
Jeremy, you really need to read the news, and I'm not talking about Fox News.  Read the European papers.  It was reported in February that the Chinese and Japanese are cutting back on buying our bonds.

The US Government has no problems raising funds ... none whatsoever.  We borrow at 3.7% for 10 years.

What do you pay to borrow unsecured for 10 years?  

If we were in as bad shape as you say, why would people continue to lend us their hard earned savings for 3.7% a year?

You know why?  Because there is NO SAFER INVESTMENT IN THE WORLD than US Treasuries.

That's all you need to see to know you are wrong in your analysis of our position.

Quote from: jasonrandolph
And if you think Social Security and Medicare funds are put aside and not used for anything else, then you are ignorant of your history.

Do you know what pay-as-you-go means?  Do you understand how these programs work?

I know exactly how this stuff works ... I have a masters in economics and finance.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 11:13:12 pm
Quote from: trops
....

So when your house is burning down ... you'll take care of it yourself, right?  Or the volunteers will ...

I know you wouldn't dare call upon the municipal fire department ... 'cause you don't like socialism ... and you are philosophically opposed to my property being transferred to your benefit.

That's cool ... just be sure to remember never to call the cops, or fire department ... 'cause it violates your philosophy.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: jasonrandolph on March 23, 2010, 11:20:32 pm
Quote from: trops
While the cost issues and the types of techniques used to get this bill passed are extremely important, the larger and more significant issue for many Americans who are opposed to the bill is mainly a philosophical one. And whether it is characterized as big government versus small government or individual liberties versus government control of the individual, the issue has more to do with preserving America's great experiment - namely the idea that it is the individual and not the state that is all important. In all of history, that never happened before.  Of course, we are far removed from that original start, and quite honestly it is partly due to the fact that most people, once they are provided with an "entitlement" are loath to give it up.  As for the claim that health care or even education or a nice home is a right -- rights are not something that the government grants to the individual but rather stem from the fact of our very human nature.  And one guideline to distinguishing those unalienable rights from bogus rights is this: you can't claim as a right something that violates another's rights. And rights has a very specific meaning as described in the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. Everyone recognizes that you can't steal from another because you would be depriving that person of his/her right to his/her property. But if the government forces one to give up "property" so that it can give it to someone else, lots of folks don't seem to see anything wrong with that. So while most of us would agree that it would be a wonderful thing for everyone to have a nice house, or a nice car, or a great job, etc. once one realizes that if that happens by taking from others by force (which the government can do), then that just cannot be defined as a right.  There are no easy answers here, but the principle of individual liberty versus statism is very clear.  And to those who claim this philosophy leads to totally self absorbed and uncaring people - consider that Americans voluntarily donate the largest amounts to charities and aid to people in need of any people on the planet.

Trops, I couldn't have said it better myself.  And so I won't try.    
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: jwhee0615 on March 23, 2010, 11:20:37 pm
Quote from: ndevlin
Photography, not least in in America, has a long and honourable tradition of bringing casues of social injustice to light. The visual truth has been a powerful force for social change in the last century.

What is truly sad and frightening, as graphically illustrated by this thread, is that,200 years after pioneering modern democracy, America has lost the ability to conduct a civil, intelligent, informed debate on any issue of public policy.  Propaganists demagogues (who masquerade as 'news' sources) have reduced the level of discussion to such a low level of lies and inane untruths, build upon the narrative of fear and threat which was fed to the nation by its central government for almost a decade, that one wonders how long it will be before the rancour simply descends into violence.  Good thing Americans aren't heavily armed or anything.

When I was young, there was often talk of how Canada would simply, inevitably become part of the US because we were so similar. Now, I look south and see a land riven by fear, hate, religious extremism, and institutionalized corporate theivery passed-off as a 'freedom from govt control',  unable even to have a civil conversation about how to achieve minimal levels of compassionate medical care for one another.  If this keeps up, I wouldn't be surprised to see America fracture into a number of smaller, poor,violent, and globally insignificant pieces within my lifetime.  

So sad.

- N.


ps. you might recall that Michael has more than a passing interest in the subject of US health-care, having held a massive print-sale on this site to raise funds to pay for medical care for a family friend with a grave illness, who had exhausted her private insurance. It's all a great government take-over, until it's your mother or sister who needs chemotherapy.....

Well said N. I truly believe that the biggest problem in this whole debate is the mis-information and outright propaganda from the so call "fair and balanced news agency" and the right wing talk show hosts. I cant believe any half educated individual would drink the cool-aid that spews from the mouths of these media outlets. Just check out the motives of the republicans and look where their money comes from.

If these people would bother to seek out real news from other sources such as the CBC, BBC, Deutsche Welle and the like maybe they would get a better balanced idea of what is really happening around the globe. I hope this country doesn't break down and fortunately I'm married to a Canadian so my kids have options!
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: JeffKohn on March 23, 2010, 11:27:08 pm
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Do you know what pay-as-you-go means?  Do you understand how these programs work?
Sure, it's quite simple actually. For decades, Social Security was bringing in more than it was paying out, and congress was perfectly happy to spend that surplus like drunken sailors. But now the trend is reversing, and the "lockbox" is nowhere to be found. SS and Medicare worked great when you had 1/2 dozen or more workers paying in for each person receiving benefits. The WW2 generation got a great deal, receiving far more in benefits than they ever paid into those systems. But that's not sustainable with an aging population, and  pay as you go isn't going work going forward as the trend reverses and more and more of those baby-boomers retire.

I can agree that all citizens are entitled to basic health care; but I don't agree that they're "entitled" to free doctor's visit, free prescription drugs, and cutting edge diagnostics and treatments at the drop of a hat. It's just not realistic, which is why most single-payer systems are plagued with waiting lists and rationing.

The real problem with our health care system is the way the true costs are hidden from users. People are a lot more likely to go to the doctor for a cold when it's a $10 co-pay, after all it doesn't cost them anything right? And then doctors run unnecessary tests just to be safe and protect themselves from malpractice lawsuits, and the patients don't see the cost of that either.  Maybe if people had to actually write a check for their premiums instead of having the non-subsidized portion withheld from their paychecks, and they also had annual deductibles on their policies, they'd be a little less likely to make frivolous use of the system since they could actually see the impact to their pocket book from those unnecessary doctor's visits, or from insisting on the latest prescription drugs when there are more affordable alternatives. The current system encourages wasteful use.

As for the health insurance bill, I think a lot of people who oppose it agree that reforms were needed: things like making sure that you can't get your coverage dropped just because you get sick, or making sure that people with pre-existing conditions can get coverage, etc. But this bill is just a bad deal, and no amount of spin by the democrats changes that fact. It would have been one thing if they had said, "it's the right thing to do no matter the cost", but I find it truly amazing that Polosi et al can stand up there with a straight face and say that this bill will reduce the deficit. They can't possibly be that stupid, so the only conclusion I can draw is that they're liars. The CBO estimate is only for the first decade, in which you have 10 years of taxation to pay for 6 years of benefits, and it also double-counts savings in Medicare that have little chance of ever materializing. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what's going to happen in the second decade. The fact is this bill takes no concrete actions to control costs, it's only going to make things worse.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 23, 2010, 11:47:46 pm
Quote from: JeffKohn
Sure, it's quite simple actually.

Yes ... it is quite simple.  We are a society ... a community ... a big extended American family.

And ... as such ... we should do some basic things to make it a nice community.

We should take care of our elderly and the less fortunate ... simple.  That's the society that I want to live in.  That's my philosophy.

And we can afford it.  We absolutely can.

So ... if you want to call that sad - and you know who you are - go ahead ... call it sad.  You can even call me a hippie ... I won't mind.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Ray on March 24, 2010, 12:38:35 am
I wasn't aware that this was a topic that Michael had initiated on 'What's New', and also wondered 'what the heck has this to do with photography'.

Indirectly, of course, the issue does affect photography, as it affects everything else. If anyone is suddenly faced with massive health bills, his entire lifestyle may be radically changed, including further upgrades to camera equipment.

I consider myself fortunate to be a national of a country which has an excellent health system. I'm amazed that a country like America that leads the world in so many respects should have such a poor safety net for the  under-privileged.

I don't pay anything for health insurance, except for a small charge on my tax return to support the national medicare system.

Fortunately, I'm blessed with good health, so far. But I recently slipped down a bank after a shower of rain, and fractured my right wrist as I attempted to protect my fall. My arm was in plaster for a few weeks and I've made several visits to the physiotherapist after the plaster was removed. All of which has not cost me a penny. Furthermore, I have interesting conversations with my physiotherapist, ranging from the importance of keeping fit to my boasting of my exploits in the Himalayas, which brings me to the main point of my post.

The most effective, and by far the cheapest health insurance ever devised, is a lifestyle practice of eating wholesome food and taking plenty of exercise. If you are not doing that, not eating wholsome food and not exercising, then I'm afraid the reality is, you are unwittingly booking yourself into a hospital bed in the future, in the hope that such beds are available if you don't subscribe to expensive private health cover.

Prevention is always better than cure.

Whenever I have to visit a clinic or a hospital, as I have recently because of my wrist fracture, I see other patients sitting in chairs to wait their turn. They are more often than not, overweight slobs. They look as though they've never taken a day's exercise in their life. What do they expect?

It's a sad fact of world nutrition, that many people in wealthy countries not only over-eat, but over-eat the wrong sort of food because it's tasty, whilst many of those in poor countries cannot get enough food whether wholesome or not.

One section of the world is making itself ill through overeating, resulting in massive medical expenses, whilst another section of the world is making itself ill through undereating, causing massive damage to brain development and intelligence.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: John Camp on March 24, 2010, 12:41:02 am
I think there might have been a way to provide universal care, but this wasn't it. Almost all major issues, including things like Social Security and Medicare were accomplished in at least a somewhat bipartisan way, with popular approval, and had a lot of people working together to get the law right. This was true even of terribly controversial things, like the Civil Rights acts of the 50s and 60s, which saw Republicans and Democrats working together on them.


This was totally partisan, and not only partisan, but because the Democratic leadership didn't even have the basic votes in their own party, it became completely corrupt -- so thoroughly corrupt that one US Senator, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, sold his vote for special treatment for Nebraskans, and saw his 60+ percent approval rating vanish in his own state. He is now considered unlikely to be re-elected, because his own constituents -- the people who would benefit from this corruption -- were so disgusted with what he'd done. Large portions of the American population also get special treatment under this bill, while others are disproportionately hurt (and not the wealthy.) If you have a negotiated plan set up as a part of a union contract, your health care insurance won't be affected. For you, nothing changes. You are simply out of the deal. But that means that the total number of people who have to pay more, to subsidize those who can't pay, is smaller, and so their rates will be even higher; further, those "gold-plated plans" retain their tax exempt status, so while the rest of us pay for medical insurance with after-tax dollars, the union plans, worth thousand and thousands of dollars, are not taxed at all. Those provision were Democratic concessions to their labor union supporters

I'm a Democrat, and even a liberal one, who has contributed substantial sums to Democratic candidates, but this whole thing stinks so badly, and pits so many interest groups against each other, that I'm ashamed of the party for doing it. There had to be a better way. The time for universal coverage may be here, but all Americans ought to be in it together -- there shouldn't be different classes of beneficiaries, depending on who bought or sold a vote to whom. I wanted a medical bill, but was praying that this one would be defeated, and that perhaps Mrs.Pelosi and her accomplices would be pushed out of their positions. We needed to start over, and try to preserve some semblance of fairness.

Now what? I think there's an excellent chance that the Republicans will get control of the House this fall, or if not, be so close as to be able to thwart the plans for actually operating this mess. I don't think they could repeal it -- there will be too many beneficiaries, even in Republican districts -- but what we could get is the worst of all worlds: a terribly corrupt, convoluted law that is further gummed up by Republican intransigence.

By the way, the people who use phrases like "a country as rich as this one," etc., simply have no idea of what this will cost. We are essentially talking about a takeover of about 1/5 of the American economy by the same people who set up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and made possible the enormous financial crash of the past few years (the bankers were the gamblers, all right, but it was Congress that built the casino.) And that stuff about the cost of the "war of choice" -- the cost of the "war of choice" is trivial beside the cost of this. America could run the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan without noticing the cost, even though there are tens of billions of dollars involved. But the cost of the medical bill is so huge, that it *had* to be done right.

For people interested in finance, by the way, it should be noted the the bonds Warren Buffett just sold to pay for his acquisition of the Santa Fe railroad sold for interest rates *lower* than new US government bonds. That is seriously ominous -- that people would bet that the US is more likely to default than Warren Buffett.  

I think in most ways, Canada did their medical system pretty well. They have some problems that could probably be alleviated by allowing private clinics and add-on insurance policies, but basically, even without those things, they did it pretty well. This is nothing like Canada.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Dan Carter on March 24, 2010, 01:14:49 am
Just want to go on record as being in absolute disagreement with Michael and the rest of you who think this is a Big Day for the US.

To believe that a minority of the US population and a socialist, lying, law breaking congress has the right to enslave the majority in order to pay for anything is shameful. With luck, come November, all of the Democats who voted for this 2000+ page marxist handbook will be unemployed. And you, who were reaching into the rest of our pockets to pay for your health care will have to go to work and PAY YOUR OWN WAY.

Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 24, 2010, 01:17:10 am
Quote from: John Camp
For people interested in finance, by the way, it should be noted the the bonds Warren Buffett just sold to pay for his acquisition of the Santa Fe railroad sold for interest rates *lower* than new US government bonds. That is seriously ominous -- that people would bet that the US is more likely to default than Warren Buffett.

Sounds like an arb to me ... short the BRK and buy the treasury bond.

The US Gov't can't default as it borrows in its own currency ... so it has zero credit risk.

Berkshire has SOME credit risk ... albeit not much over a two year horizon.

The only risk in the treasury is inflation ... but the Berkshire bond has the same inflation risk + credit risk.

Your conclusion that the US Gov't has a higher probability of default is incorrect.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 24, 2010, 01:19:05 am
Quote from: Dan Carter
marxist handbook

What a laugh ... marxist ... say it again ... louder ... maybe it will  make sense if you scream it at the top of your lungs ...
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 24, 2010, 01:19:24 am
Quote from: John Camp
... And that stuff about the cost of the "war of choice" -- the cost of the "war of choice" is trivial beside the cost of this. America could run the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan without noticing the cost, even though there are tens of billions of dollars involved...
Trivial!? Hmmm... let me see: the cost of war so far in Iraq and Afghanistan is estimated to be above $1 trillion... the cost of healthcare reform is estimated to be... $1 trillion. Looks like the only "trivial" thing is the difference.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 24, 2010, 01:23:25 am
Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic
Trivial!? Hmmm... let me see: the cost of war so far in Iraq and Afghanistan is estimated to be above $1 trillion... the cost of healthcare reform is estimated to be... $1 trillion. Looks like the only "trivial" thing is the difference.
... and ... the direct and indirect costs of the Iraq/Afghan wars have been estimated to be as high as $3 trillion ...
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: John Camp on March 24, 2010, 01:24:53 am
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Sounds like an arb to me ... short the BRK and buy the treasury bond.

The US Gov't can't default as it borrows in its own currency ... so it has zero credit risk.

Berkshire has SOME credit risk ... albeit not much over a two year horizon.

The only risk in the treasury is inflation ... but the Berkshire bond has the same inflation risk + credit risk.

Your conclusion that the US Gov't has a higher probability of default is incorrect.

Far be it from me to challenge one of the Masters of the Universe, but that's not what they're saying at the WSJ or Bloomberg:

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/fundmastery/2...bonds-we-trust/ (http://blogs.marketwatch.com/fundmastery/2010/03/22/in-buffetts-bonds-we-trust/)
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 24, 2010, 01:28:39 am
Quote from: John Camp
Far be it from me to challenge one of the Masters of the Universe, but that's not what they're saying at the WSJ or Bloomberg:

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/fundmastery/2...bonds-we-trust/ (http://blogs.marketwatch.com/fundmastery/2010/03/22/in-buffetts-bonds-we-trust/)

I'm not disputing the fact that there was a minimal negative spread ...

I'm disputing the interpretation.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: John Camp on March 24, 2010, 01:29:56 am
Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic
Trivial!? Hmmm... let me see: the cost of war so far in Iraq and Afghanistan is estimated to be above $1 trillion... the cost of healthcare reform is estimated to be... $1 trillion. Looks like the only "trivial" thing is the difference.

That's eight years of war. Nobody but the Congress (and its creatures) estimates the cost of the medical bill at $1 trillion: the actual cost is estimated by most authorities at about $2.4 trillion. I'm not saying the war is a trivial matter -- too many people have been killed -- but the cost of the war can also be borrowed and then amortized over a long period of time. The cost of the medical bill is annual, and never ends.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Dan Carter on March 24, 2010, 01:31:57 am
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Yes ... it is quite simple. We are a society ... a community ... a big extended American family.

And ... as such ... we should do some basic things to make it a nice community.

We should take care of our elderly and the less fortunate ... simple. That's the society that I want to live in. That's my philosophy.

And we can afford it. We absolutely can.

So ... if you want to call that sad - and you know who you are - go ahead ... call it sad. You can even call me a hippie ... I won't mind.

Well, that's just fine. If you want to live in that type of society, by all means do it. But don't use a socialist congress to force those not interested in your philosophy to pay for it. I personally don't want to be part of a family that's busy picking my pocket.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 24, 2010, 01:40:44 am
Quote from: Dan Carter
Well, that's just fine. If you want to live in that type of society, by all means do it. But don't use a socialist congress to force those not interested in your philosophy to pay for it. I personally don't want to be part of a family that's busy picking my pocket.

I do live in a society like that ... it is called the United States of America ... whether through government or other means, we do take care of each other ... you think that is a bad thing?

Where do you draw the line ... would you abolish public schools? social security? medicare? fire departments?  police?
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 24, 2010, 01:44:22 am
Quote from: John Camp
That's eight years of war. Nobody but the Congress (and its creatures) estimates the cost of the medical bill at $1 trillion: the actual cost is estimated by most authorities at about $2.4 trillion. I'm not saying the war is a trivial matter -- too many people have been killed -- but the cost of the war can also be borrowed and then amortized over a long period of time. The cost of the medical bill is annual, and never ends.

You just don't get it ... WE ALREADY PAY FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE ... far more than we should.

We need healthcare ... we didn't need to take $3 trillion and burn it in the backyard.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Dan Carter on March 24, 2010, 01:48:07 am
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
I do live in a society like that ... it is called the United States of America ... whether through government or other means, we do take care of each other ... you think that is a bad thing?

Where do you draw the line ... would you abolish public schools? social security? medicare? fire departments? police?


Very simple. I draw the line when, due to taxation, 50% of my income is confiscated not donated for others I could care less about instead of my family.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 24, 2010, 01:52:00 am
Quote from: Dan Carter
for others I could care less about

Exactly.  I can't believe you actually said it ... but that's it in a nutshell.

You don't care about other people ... now THAT'S sad.

Good night, y'all ... it has been fun ...
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: ErikKaffehr on March 24, 2010, 02:15:09 am
Hi,

All countries here in Europe have a healthcare for all system. Still costs in Europe are much lower than they have been in the US, see the figures from 2007 here:

http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/y/universal.htm#stat (http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/y/universal.htm#stat)

Quality of health care obviously differs between countries.

I don't know what's wrong with the US health care system, it's obviously not very cost effective. Note that in the diagram above total spending in OECD average is about the same as public spending was in US, still discussing 2007 figures.

Another issue is that whether the spending is private (mostly payed with insurances) or public (mostly payed with taxes) it still needs to be payed. Having an efficient health care system would be beneficiary for the total economy of a nation.

We have a lot of problems with health care here in Europe, too. Costs are high and there are issues with availability.

Best regards
Erik




Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Yes ... it is quite simple.  We are a society ... a community ... a big extended American family.

And ... as such ... we should do some basic things to make it a nice community.

We should take care of our elderly and the less fortunate ... simple.  That's the society that I want to live in.  That's my philosophy.

And we can afford it.  We absolutely can.

So ... if you want to call that sad - and you know who you are - go ahead ... call it sad.  You can even call me a hippie ... I won't mind.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Gellman on March 24, 2010, 03:57:01 am
Quote
If anyone is suddenly faced with massive health bills, his entire lifestyle may be radically changed, including further upgrades to camera equipment.


Finally, a relevant comment. What we really need is upgrade reform.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Rob C on March 24, 2010, 06:34:51 am
I don't live in the States and all I know for sure about going there is that, whenever I had to, the relevant travel insurance went through the roof compared with most other places to which I travelled.

I don't see this as a negative thing about the States I see it as a negative thing about the muscle of the US doctor industry and the lawyer industry.

People in the UK complain about going into hospital and not being able to understand the doctor or even the nurse because they are often non-native English speakers; people have been killed by under-trained medical staff coming over to the UK to practise (probably in BOTH senses of the word!) and fucking up big-time. A man was recently killed by an Indian doctor who had previously worked in Germany who overdosed ten-fold. I can see that happen very easily: here, in Spain, they don't write 10.7 when they mean ten and seven tenths - to confuse fractions with decimal points for a moment - they write 10,7. (After almost thirty years of living here I can still become doubtful over that tiny difference when figuring out whether the writer is thinking millions or hundreds when I read newspaper reports about finance.) And the reason there are so many non-native English speakers in UK hospitals is because of the huge money that so many people make deserting where they trained in order to go and work in medicine in the US: the golden lure sucks the talent and blood out of other countries. And it spreads everywhere: Spanish nurses we had would speak to us about waiting to travel to work in Britain - the chain goes on and on. That's why medicine is so needlessly over-expensive; go look in the carparks at the private hospitals: I walked one an hour a day, ever day, as exercise for five weeks during one of my wife's stints as a patient. The same huge shiny cars sat there during that 'holiday' as well as during all the others we spent there. They were NOT patients' cars, or if they were, the medics sure weren't doing a good job of sending the patients home any time soon!

That's probably the root of it all, the fear about costs of medicine for all: the huge money that goes into one private pocket based on another's private distress.

As I have said before, I have experienced and paid for both the private and state medical services and it turns out that the differnce comes down to whether you share a room with another patient or have a room to yourself. Frankly, I'd rather just get well as quickly as possible. As I also mentioned elsewhere, there is the situation happening in some organisations where the private hospital becomes part of an insurance group; when that occurs, the result seems to be that patients facing serious or doubtful outcomes to intervention can find themselves shunted off to the state alternative by the private hospital (assuming they are entitled to it, as most are) which doesn't want to spend the money nor face the risk of losing a patient in its care.

I am no 'socialist' in an ideological/political sense, but I do feel that there are such things as basic human rights to health and some dignity in life that should transcend the power of the individual wallet.

Rob C
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jim Pascoe on March 24, 2010, 06:55:28 am
Quote from: perl_monger
I am sympathetic to the story of and am grateful to Michael for having a print sale in support of a friend in need. There are stories and anecdotes on both sides of this argument - I work for a UK company and read the newspaper accounts of neglected patients, denied care, shortages, how bureaucrats outnumber doctors 2:1, and the like. This comes from UK papers, not US. And I know people in Buffalo, NY, who work in hospitals that do a very good business from Canadians seeking care here. Didn't Danny Williams choose to come to the US for heart surgery - 'my heart, my choice'?
I live in the UK and you would be foolish to believe everything you read in the newspapers here.  Most of the editorial has a political angle and are looking for 'bad news' stories to horrify people.  I am nearly 50 years old and in my lifetime I, my family and friends, and pretty much everyone I have come into contact with have had excellent treatment within the National Health Service (NHS).  Are there problems?  Of course there are. The NHS is the biggest employer in the UK and a massive organisation.  Money is tight now and always has been.  The cost of treatment and drugs is escalating and it is difficult to keep up with the investment needed.  But on the whole it is perceived as a fair system that treats everyone and is free at the point of treatment.  I worry about paying off my mortgage and providing for a pension in old age, but one thing I do not have to worry about is healthcare.

Jim
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Pete Ferling on March 24, 2010, 07:18:05 am
All of this is academic fun, really.   However, let's not forget that the 76 million Baby Boomers, those whom represent the lions share of the economy now, are also starting to hit the pasture, and that will create a significant spike in the number of elderly and those also requiring medical care in the next decade.  Obviously supported by a smaller workforce, the majority of burger flipping, shelf stocking, cart pushing small cog in the big machine folks... It will be interesting to see if ANY government bandage will suffice.

In regards to those of you whom cry foul because you feel that this forum like so many others are not 'proper' places to talk about government issues, you need to understand that such thinking is the root cause of our current political climate to begin with.  So while you ignore, put aside, or find these conversations for reasons unknown as 'difficult', you do know that a choice will be made for in your absence, and you'll just have to live it with.

"Well Doctor, what kind of government do we have - a Monarchy or a Republic?"

"A Republic, if you can keep it."
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Adam L on March 24, 2010, 07:58:32 am
I work for a large IT outsourcing company.  My job is to support the sales organization by pricing up new business.   In the US, we have a real competitive problem that will get worse with this reform package.  It's a simple fact that we cannot win new business if we do so using US only labor.   We get our pants beaten off us every time we try.   We compete by blending offshore rates (India and such) with some US labor.  In these cases we are competitive and do win our share of deals.  The result is less US workers but it's better than the alternative.

This onshore/offshore mix of labor will HAVE to shift to more offshore resources to offset the increase in taxes.   This means that US employment will decrease.  We have to choose between winning no business and winning some business.  These are the realities in our market today.

To drive this home further, the average wage rate in the US for an experienced IT resource is about $100,000 annually.  This includes fringe and health care costs.   Compare this to a similar experienced person in India who's annual salary is under $30,000.   If you were a customer making a buying decision and realized that you're receiving the same product at hugely different prices...which would you choose?

***
I don't understand why we needed government takeover in order to put in place some reforms to this system.    I hear that Insurance companies are reaping extraordinary profits, but when I look at income statements and annual reports, their profits are much less than many industries.   When one compares the average wage of a private sector employee to a government employee, it's the govt employee that receives better pay and better benefits, not the private sector.  

Ask yourself why there were so many closed meetings and payoffs to get the democratic party to support this bill.  There is bipartisan support against this reform, single party payola support for this reform.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Chris_T on March 24, 2010, 07:59:29 am
Quote from: fredjeang
USA was the only place of the richest contry in the world that did not provide this basic service for free!
Maybe Germany or France etc...are third world nation?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/ (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/)
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Chris_T on March 24, 2010, 08:04:23 am
Suggestion to Michael:

Provide logos for an elephant and a donkey, and let the members add them to their signatures. Then we will know where their comments on photography are coming from.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: fredjeang on March 24, 2010, 09:06:43 am
well well well.
I left this topic yesterday at night, spanish time, and back this morning, saw the impressive amount of animated posts, arguments and strongly opposed positions.
I'm really impressed by the brain washing that have been victims some americans, associating health care with kind of socialism or comunism regimes.
There is a mass manipulation, too much tv or whatever is the reason.

So, maybe Canada is a comunist country, no? USA should build a barrier on the canadian's border then, instead of the mexican one...to be safed from this horrible socialist regime that is contaminating the freedom of the us citizens. Do you see the ridiculous of the situation?

The fact is that all the richest countries in the world, fully capitalists and democratics, provide health care service to their citizens. That, simply can not happen in Africa.
Holand, sweeden are also probably dangerous socialist US ennemies with their super developped healph care system...come on guys! Free Health care is a basic rich states service that has nothing to do with politic's colors. And they can do it because they are rich.

Fred.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: David Hufford on March 24, 2010, 09:34:31 am
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Please ... do you honestly believe that the wealthiest country in the world can't afford to provide decent health care to its population?

Nonsense.

A trillion dollars is only 7% of annual income ... that's a big number, but we are a HUGE country with a nearly $15 trillion economy.

We can afford it.  Don't believe ANYONE who says otherwise ... they are either ignorant of the facts to pursuing a different agenda.

You can oppose this ... but not because we can't afford it ... we can't afford NOT to do this.

Well. I sorta think it is time that we did something about health-care in the US and I think this MAY be a good start. Not so sure about the "can afford it" part since we can't afford to operate the country now without China and Japan's money. Should they for some reason be unable or unwilling to continue, then we'd have to raise taxes on someone other than the other guy or make some real cuts, either of which might be un-American to some.

I live in a country with mandatory health insurance (Japan) and while for most run-of-the-mill illnesses it is very nice, it has some serious flaws (the extreme difficulty of winning a malpractice suit or getting an incompetent doctor's license withdrawn) and it is not likely that Japan can continue to provide such care. They have already raised the patient's share of the payments several times----it's around 30% and isn't going to get any better. And that doesn't cover the "gifts" that are still customary to doctors in some situations...(T Reid done forgetted to mentioned that and more on his Japan Frontline spot, but then again, he pretty much ruled out Japan's system as applicable to the US. Too generous and too expensive.)

Now if Uncle Sam would withdraw its military from certain places (hint: one place would be the still second largest economy  on earth, 日本)and all over the world, perhaps we could more confidently provide such basic services for our own citizens.  Let the UN or another country take up the world policeman role.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 24, 2010, 09:35:24 am
Quote from: ckimmerle
Not sure exactly why it was attached to the health care bill, but it does make a lot of sense. Student loans are big business for banks who, of course, profit from the accrued interest. The trouble is that banks earn this money, hundreds of millions of dollars annually, without taking ANY risks as these loans are insured by the federal government. It's free money for them.

Does it make good economic sense to back for-profit loans taxpayer dollars? By skipping the middle man (banks) loans may actually get less expensive and the revenue, if done correctly, can help fund the program.


I don't have the cite at hand, but the last I read about the new government Student Loan program is that his will cost the students MORE...about 1700 bucks over the life of the loan...now that the thing has gone governmental.  

This bill needs to be killed in the courts.  It is clearly unconstitutional.


Imagine, in AMERICA being forced to purchase a product from a private company to remain a lawful citizen!  Whats next?  A required Chevy?
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: JamiePeters on March 24, 2010, 01:01:17 pm
This thread should be pulled.  This is a lose lose thread.  Tis is not the forum for this and if anyone read the bill.  They would not be clapping or cheering.  Hello, wake up Misses Bueller.  I thought this was an educated group.  When some states get 300 million to get there vote others don't have to pay in like Nebraska.  The Gov gets to expand to 159 new agencies, Yes I said 159 new agencies hiring how many people,  when they hire usually the least qualified people and are the laziest people ever hired.  Yeh that's a great plan.  

Health care is not a right, it should be earned and then only offered when you have worked.  Can't wait till one you cheering public have to go in and get the run around,

IF THEY CAN'T THE MONOPOLY CALLED THE POST OFFICE HOW CAN THEY MANAGE YOUR HEALTH CARE.  WAKE AND SMELL THE COFFEE!!!!!!

I work damn long and hard hours to get what I got, so others can benefit from me.  Not a chance, this bill is for the lazy, who are milking this country dry!

And keep the comments of the war out of this conversation, we wouldn't be there if we had a U.N. could do there job.  As usual we have to fix what they screwed up or were to inept to do right.  JP
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: BJL on March 24, 2010, 01:09:23 pm
Quote from: thebatman
Hopefully Michael and others will post similar congratulations 20 years from now when the US declares bankruptcy.
Given the many nations that have had more comprehensively universal government subsidized health care for decades, have significantly lower per capita healthcare expenditures, better overall outcomes on measures like lower infant mortality and higher life expectancy, and are not bankrupt, I am not worried about that happening. As an Australian, I will point out that the current healthcare debate there is only on how to improve the public part of its popular and over thirty year old public/private health care system, with not the slightest popular desire to "privatize".
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Paul Roark on March 24, 2010, 01:48:37 pm
Quote from: fredjeang
Congratulations for the US !
This is truly an historic date...

Thank you, and yes, it  is a big deal.

I did economic analysis in the context of antitrust law enforcement, with the US Federal Trade Commission for 25 years.  As a non-partisan, a-political person, both parties invited  me back to assist with running of the agency, and I gracefully declined with both in order to protect my non-partisan status.

The work I did included some health care related issues.

The bottom line from an antitrust perspective is that some fields, which may include modern health care, have such huge economies of scale, that putting together a rational and competitive  system may be impossible given the structure of the industry.  The complainants in the health care area in my experience were often not rabble-rousing, naive types.  Not infrequently they included the CEOs of the largest and best hospitals and health care providers.

We were dealing with some of the rather small -- in comparison -- issues. However, I gained a major appreciation for  the complexity and disfunctionality of the system.  

No one can predict exactly how this will all work out;  it's way too complex.  It'll be interesting to see what happens.  

As cynical as we often are of our processes, I came to the conclusion that the only thing worth believing in is that a modern democracy makes better decisions than the alternatives, and this one just made a major decision.  


Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Ben Rubinstein on March 24, 2010, 02:14:44 pm
Being English I will say that without the NHS I wouldn't be able to walk today. Can't imagine the ridiculous amounts of money you Americans pay each month for health care and our taxes are less than yours as well, for self employed, much much less. Of course it does mean that you wait for operations but you always have the choice to pay for private health care and many do as I have done in the past when I needed something done fast. The idea is choice.

I'm relatively right wing myself but some of the 'right wing' viewpoints expressed here and some of the phraseology has shocked me to my core. I believe that CNN is as guilty of being left as Fox is of being right with all that implies (they are just as bad but in the other direction) and for those who think the BBC is the holy grail of apolitical coverage, please, it's anything but. However, the idea and concept that there is only black and white in politics whether left or right is pretty abhorent to Europeans and horribly close minded.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Alan Goldhammer on March 24, 2010, 02:26:59 pm
I'm just getting around to reading this thread right now.  All I can say with a great deal of confidence is there is an incredible amount of vitriol and misinformation being put forth.  I "may" be the only person commenting here that has a direct connection with this legislation.  My employer was one of the first organizations to come out and support health care reform early last year.  Our representatives met with Senator Baucus and President Obama.  It's no secret in Washington DC that we supported this legislative approach and worked hard to achieve it.  I don't think we would support a government takeover of the health care industry.  The important thing to note is that this approach continues to rely on private sector delivery of health care benefits.  Health insurance companies are in no way being socialized.  Adverse selection and non-coverage of pre-existing conditions will be outlawed (and very quickly).  For those of you who object to the mandates (including the state's attorney generals who are filing lawsuits that stand no chance of success in the courts) case law is pretty clear that this is permitted under the Constitution.  If you don't have mandates, you cannot have reasonable private sector insurance delivery without astronomical rates (in fact the insurance lobby supports the mandate provision because it allows them to have a more balanced pool); witness what happened in California recently when Anthem announced 39% rate increases for individual polices.  Why did they do this?  Because the young healthy people were forgoing insurance leaving only those who would be bigger consumers of health care.  This sounds like a pretty reasonable business decision to me.  Even in "socialist" Europe there is private sector delivery with mandates.  The Netherlands requires all citizens to purchase a health insurance policy as does Switzerland.  There systems work pretty well.

Finally for those of us who believe we have the best health care system in the world I urge you to look at the data.  Numerous countries have longer life expectancies and lower infant mortality than the US for 1/2 the cost per capita.

Anyone wanting further details, I will be happy to answer by private message as I don't want to clog this thread up any more than it is.

Title: Big day for the US
Post by: JamiePeters on March 24, 2010, 02:28:10 pm
Quote from: Jeremy Payne
... and ... the direct and indirect costs of the Iraq/Afghan wars have been estimated to be as high as $3 trillion ...
Let's keep the war out of this, If we had U.N. instead of some pussies running it, we the U.S. and a few other countries who don't stick our head in the sand wouldn't have gone in to Iraq.  Remember why they were formed, to stop future wars!!!!!

Next you will make the absolutely stupid comment, "there were no WMD's"  that's right tell that to 110,000 that were killed by them in Iraq.  I guess we were imagining those mass graves of dead kids, women and men lying there decomposing.  I guess that's right the holocaust didn't happen also.

Sorry Alan, Typo
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Alan Goldhammer on March 24, 2010, 02:46:07 pm
Quote from: JamiePeters
Next you will make the absolutely stupid comment, "there were no MWD's"  that's right tell that to 110,000 that were killed by them in Iraq.  I guess we were imagining those mass graves of dead kids, women and men lying there decomposing.  I guess that's right the holocaust didn't happen also.
What pray tell is a MWD???
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Ben Rubinstein on March 24, 2010, 02:49:06 pm
I got my new 1Ds mkIII today, wow but 21 megapixels looks different to my 5D original. Great at iso 3200 too. Contrary to all expectations my 24-105L looks even better! Just thought I'd change the subject  
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Jeremy Payne on March 24, 2010, 02:50:15 pm
Quote from: Alan Goldhammer
What pray tell is a MWD???
Metropolitan Water District.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: JamiePeters on March 24, 2010, 02:51:18 pm
Quote from: Alan Goldhammer
What pray tell is a MWD???

Sorry for the Typo,  WMD's
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: tim wolcott on March 24, 2010, 02:56:49 pm
I thought this site was to be about photography.  I have sent a email to Michael, asking this to be pulled.  This is not why we come here and the thread never should have been allowed.  

The battle will be raged in other areas and places over this issue, make your voices heard there.  

And Yes, if you no me, and many do here, I do have very strong factual opinions on this!

Spring is starting very quickly and this is what we should be focusing on.  Here is something to cheer you up, take a deep breath and see the magic in spring.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: JamiePeters on March 24, 2010, 03:09:57 pm
When are going to teach some classes here.  I know you have the other workshops, but could be fun.  Put me on the list.  Very nice image, thanks for posting it, and calming us down.  JP
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: michael on March 24, 2010, 03:11:48 pm
No, I will not pull it Tim.

As long as the discourse remains about ideas rather than insults, it stands.

There's more to life than photography, and America being dragged kicking and screaming into 20th Century health care (notice I don't write 21st Century, because it's not there yet) is a good thing and worthy of discussion here, and anywhere else.

Michael
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: tim wolcott on March 24, 2010, 04:06:14 pm
Thanks Michael, it just seemed like steam was coming out of my computer when reading this.  It's like africa Hot.

Yes, your right Michael, I do spend an tremendous amount of time studying, looking and appreciating photography and every aspect of it.  Tim
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: ErikKaffehr on March 24, 2010, 04:18:54 pm
Hi,

My guess is that a successful reform of health care would benefit most citizens, but may not benefit the health care industry and the insurance business which essentially takes the customers money and give to the health care industry making a healthy profit for them selves.

Best regards
Erik



Quote from: michael
No, I will not pull it Tim.

As long as the discourse remains about ideas rather than insults, it stands.

There's more to life than photography, and America being dragged kicking and screaming into 20th Century health care (notice I don't write 21st Century, because it's not there yet) is a good thing and worthy of discussion here, and anywhere else.

Michael
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Mike Louw on March 24, 2010, 04:29:10 pm
Quote from: ErikKaffehr
Hi,

My guess is that a successful reform of health care would benefit most citizens, but may not benefit the health care industry and the insurance business which essentially takes the customers money and give to the health care industry making a healthy profit for them selves.

Best regards
Erik

As an outsider,  relatively ignorant of the US healthcare system, I have one question to which I'd really appreciate honest answers from those in the know:

If I were a, say, 40 year old US citizen, born and resident in the US, but jobless through no fault of my own due to ill health and having no insurance, what quality of health care would I receive for my chronic condition (I'm not talking of ER treatment)? How would it compare with the care available to a wealthy individual with private insurance? How would waiting times for treatment differ?
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Photo Op on March 24, 2010, 04:36:45 pm
Quote from: JamiePeters
.....The Gov gets to expand to 159 new agencies, Yes I said 159 new agencies hiring how many people,  when they hire usually the least qualified people and are the laziest people ever hired......

.......Health care is not a right, it should be earned and then only offered when you have worked......

.....I work damn long and hard hours to get what I got, so others can benefit from me.  Not a chance, this bill is for the lazy, who are milking this country dry!......

I'm going out on a limb here, but my guess is you didn't vote for President Obama!
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 24, 2010, 04:39:19 pm
Quote from: John Camp
That's eight years of war. Nobody but the Congress (and its creatures) estimates the cost of the medical bill at $1 trillion: the actual cost is estimated by most authorities at about $2.4 trillion. I'm not saying the war is a trivial matter -- too many people have been killed -- but the cost of the war can also be borrowed and then amortized over a long period of time. The cost of the medical bill is annual, and never ends.
Ahhmmmm.... whether you take someone's $1 trillion or your $2.4 trillions, both estimates are not annual, but over ten years, i.e., perfectly comparable with the war cost. And again, even if one takes the high estimate, we are talking about 40%, i.e., the cost of war would be 40% of the cost of healthcare, hardly something that could be described as "trivial".

And just for the record, I am not trying to justify one with the other. Both should be judged on their own merits. The only connection I am trying to point out is that the same people who complain "we can not afford it" do not seem to have the same problem with more or less the same amount of money when it goes to fund wars.
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: Rob C on March 24, 2010, 04:48:03 pm
Quote from: JamiePeters
Let's keep the war out of this, If we had U.N. instead of some pussies running it, we the U.S. and a few other countries who don't stick our head in the sand wouldn't have gone in to Iraq.  Remember why they were formed, to stop future wars!!!!!

Next you will make the absolutely stupid comment, "there were no WMD's"  that's right tell that to 110,000 that were killed by them in Iraq.  I guess we were imagining those mass graves of dead kids, women and men lying there decomposing.  I guess that's right the holocaust didn't happen also.

Sorry Alan, Typo



Jamie

I was one who thought it was a reasonably good idea to invade Iraq because it held WMDs. Except that I had no idea at the time that prior to the invasion it was already known that that was no longer the case and that the posturing from that country was for local consumption alone, designed to make it appear a more formidable adversary than it really was to anyone there wishing to take it on; I imagine you can guess which neighbour.

So, not only were you guys conned, but so were we Brits; worse, all that back-slapping from Mr Bush of the Holy Mr Blair, the assurances that the UK was the US's greatest buddy has been blown in the last few hours by Mr Netanyahu being given the same back-slappy treatment along with the assurance that the US has no greater ally than Israel.

What a long marriage that was! And we didn't even know we'd been divorced!

No wonder I never accept invitations to join clubs.

Rob C
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: ckimmerle on March 24, 2010, 05:12:32 pm
Quote from: JamiePeters
Next you will make the absolutely stupid comment, "there were no WMD's"  that's right tell that to 110,000 that were killed by them in Iraq.

To correct your assertion, we invaded Iraq, or so we were told, because they were developing WMD's that were a "direct threat" to the U.S. and other western countries. It had absolutely nothing to do with the prior internal use of chemical weapons. Tell that to the families of the 3000 plus American serviceman who have died there, so far, due to "inaccurate intelligence".
Title: Big day for the US
Post by: michael on March 24, 2010, 05:15:02 pm
OK, I think that people on both sides have now had their say and we're starting to veer off in other directions.

Topic closed.

Michael