Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Koligman who wrote (7250)	6/29/2009 9:07:42 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Their version of 'efficiency' is to limit insurance as much as they can to those who most need it in order to insure adequate 'profit'... Who should in your opinion 'get their hands on those healthcare dollars'??? They are competing. With real competitors. The problem could be solved without creating another huge, bloated, inefficient, sink-hole of a government bureaucracy. In the end, this is a liberal versus conservative view of the world. Liberals and conservatives can agree on one thing, however -- a government option eventually becomes a single payer. That's why liberals want it, that's why conservatives don't.

To: John Koligman who wrote (7250)	6/30/2009 12:35:46 AM
From: skinowski	1 Recommendation Respond to of 42652

Who should in your opinion 'get their hands on those healthcare dollars'??? Politicians deserve it the least. I suggested many things on "these pages" over the past several weeks. Deregulating hospitals, tort reform... I think we need a "safety net" system for those who have no money and no insurance - but it is not realistic to expect that everyone can equally receive the best care in the world, irregardless of costs. We don't even have a clue whether Washington would be able to run Medicare directly, without insurance companies serving as intermediaries. In any case, all this revolutionary sh*t of passing trillion dollar bills without even reading them, as if everything is a life and death emergency, must stop. This new huge across the board tax on CO2 - passed without being read by most "lawgivers" - is obscene. The public will start having serious doubts about all this pretty soon.

To: John Koligman who wrote (7250)	6/30/2009 6:27:28 AM
From: John Carragher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

states can mandate what will be covered under insurance and it forces insurance companies to adjust costs. One state has unlimited attempts at Fertility treatment: Artificial insemination (IUI) (referenced). a very costly procedure, and no restrictions on the number of attempts a couple can attempt to have a baby. if these are women who at older in age and much more difficult to get pregnant perhaps they will also have major medical bills at time of delivery. like premature babies,, twins... that cost million or more to care for until they are able to released from a hospital. However, in this one state, they have automatic welfare for applicates! just sign the application and you are on welfare and get your premature expenses fully covered. Why, it takes a year to get to the application and investigate qualifications and if turned down you are not asked to repay any funds paid... just dropped from welfare rolls. I have know a couple , both working, making decent money told by social worker at hospital to file for welfare. she helped them complete the form. Her point to them , the costs will bankrupt them. i guess that is the same thing with accepted feelings of the majority that the gov should give total care for their parents. They remove any savings etc from their parents within five years of potential death or disability and the parent goes on state welfare if he/she requires nursing home. state picks up all costs. i wonder if Obama medical program will cover all these expenses or we will still have some state control, and other federal programs without any enforcement.