Page 1 of 1

or else

Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2010 1:05 am
by kiryan
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/ ... nContent.1

"CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports starting next week, your insurance company can no longer put dollar limits on essential benefits such as hospital and lab services. Dependent children will be covered to age 26. You'll get preventive care with no deductible or co-pay. But there's a price. "
...
"Of course all of those new benefits have additional costs that will be reflected in the cost of coverage," said Rober Zirkelbach, spokesperson for America's Health Insurance Plans.
...
In response, the Obama administration has issued a remarkably stern warning to insurers: stop blaming premium hikes on health care reform or else.
...
In a letter, HHS, Health and Human Services accuses the insurance industry of "misinformation and misleading marketing" and warns "there will be zero tolerance." "We will ... keep track of insurers" who make "unjustified rate increases," says the letter, and may exclude them from a large slice of the market in "2014."

Thuggery at its best. He's almost as blunt as hugo chavez.

Re: or else

Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 7:32 pm
by teflor the ranger
Hugo Chavez may have more flash and big results, the Obama administration has style, communication, and subtlety on The Chavez administration.

Re: or else

Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 7:35 pm
by Disoputlip
Mabye the "or else" does not make sense in the american context.

But there is a real chance it could be driven better by a public company that didn't have to cater to shareholders.

Re: or else

Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 7:46 pm
by teflor the ranger
A chance that hasn't been demonstrated in the dozens of nations that have tried it. While some public implementations of health care have been ok, none have been particularly spectacular. And certainly, none have fueled the kind of R&D, or the level of care available to the American people who chose to pursue it.

Re: or else

Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 8:18 pm
by Ragorn
Sharyl Attkisson looks like Shark Attack if you read it quickly.

This thread is now about shark attacks.

Re: or else

Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 8:33 pm
by kiryan
Are we talking shark attacks with teeth or shark attack with lasers mounted to their frickin foreheads?

Re: or else

Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 8:43 pm
by Sarvis
kiryan wrote:Are we talking shark attacks with teeth or shark attack with lasers mounted to their frickin foreheads?


Both! Also the teeth are made of laser!

Re: or else

Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:38 pm
by Turxx
the problem with american healthcare is also what makes it great, and america great, its a business and business exists for making money, capitalism
if a person pays X amount for health insurance and the insurance company pays out X to the tenth for that same persons healthcare, who picks up the slack?
someone has to

Re: or else

Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 5:41 pm
by Ragorn
Sarvis wrote:
kiryan wrote:Are we talking shark attacks with teeth or shark attack with lasers mounted to their frickin foreheads?


Both! Also the teeth are made of laser!

Who's responsible this?

Re: or else

Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 5:56 pm
by teflor the ranger
Turxx wrote:the problem with american healthcare is also what makes it great, and america great, its a business and business exists for making money, capitalism
if a person pays X amount for health insurance and the insurance company pays out X to the tenth for that same persons healthcare, who picks up the slack?
someone has to

People can buy their own insurance. It's not any more expensive than the row of Xbox games I've seen in folk's houses that tell me they can't afford insurance. Otherwise, there are plenty of free clinics and other private charities and resources for those who care enough to lift a finger in their own care.

Re: or else

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:16 am
by amena wolfsnarl
get this thing back on track already

Re: or else

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:32 pm
by kiryan
Come on teflor, don't you know that video games are despicable unhealthy products destroying our national productivity and education system being peddled by a bunch of evil corporations? They're no better than tobacco companies and need to be punished.

video games, smokes, alcohol, cars, eating out, cell phones with texting and data plans, candy bars, starbucks, new clothes, expensive food. Of course they can't afford healthcare and luxuries.

Re: or else

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 5:25 pm
by Ragorn
kiryan wrote:Come on teflor, don't you know that video games are despicable unhealthy products destroying our national productivity and education system being peddled by a bunch of evil corporations? They're no better than tobacco companies and need to be punished.

video games, smokes, alcohol, cars, eating out, cell phones with texting and data plans, candy bars, starbucks, new clothes, expensive food. Of course they can't afford healthcare and luxuries.

Video games just distract young people from God. Without all those gadgets and gizmos, our youth would have more time to pray, and they would tithe properly if they weren't tempted by pleasure of the flesh.

Re: or else

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 6:25 pm
by teflor the ranger
There's a lot of video games out there that just aren't worth it.

All I am saying is: if people don't find their own health to be a priority, the general public shouldn't either. And no bullshit about future costs, just don't pay them and you won't have to worry about them.

Re: or else

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 9:14 pm
by kiryan
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2010/09/2 ... n-got-hiv/

Maybe we should ban poor, gays or blacks from public buildings in the interest of public health? I mean you might meet one there and become sexually active with them.

Re: or else

Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 1:23 am
by teflor the ranger
No, we shouldn't ban them. They have rights, whereas soda cans have none.

Re: or else

Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 4:29 am
by kiryan
Why should some rights matter in pursuit of the public good / health when others don't?

Re: or else

Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 1:56 pm
by Ragorn
kiryan wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/health/2010/09/23/study-urban-gay-bisexual-men-got-hiv/

Maybe we should ban poor, gays or blacks from public buildings in the interest of public health? I mean you might meet one there and become sexually active with them.

And we all know that sex for reasons other than procreation with your lawfully wedded member of the opposite gender is a mortal sin.

Re: or else

Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 5:05 pm
by teflor the ranger
kiryan wrote:Why should some rights matter in pursuit of the public good / health when others don't?

You're missing the point. The human beings have rights. Soda cans do not. Don't be stupid.

Re: or else

Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 5:56 pm
by Pril
teflor the ranger wrote:
kiryan wrote:Why should some rights matter in pursuit of the public good / health when others don't?

You're missing the point. The human beings have rights. Soda cans do not. Don't be stupid.


This is some backwards thinking Teflor. At one point Blacks didn't have rights either. Your kind of close minded mentality is what is keeping the Soda down!

Re: or else

Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 5:57 pm
by teflor the ranger
Pril wrote:
teflor the ranger wrote:
kiryan wrote:Why should some rights matter in pursuit of the public good / health when others don't?

You're missing the point. The human beings have rights. Soda cans do not. Don't be stupid.


This is some backwards thinking Teflor. At one point Blacks didn't have rights either. Your kind of close minded mentality is what is keeping the Soda down!

Shut up you goddamn soda can.

Re: or else

Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 4:20 am
by Kifle
I like the trend of infecting political threads with aids... it's the best of both worlds. Kudos, rag.

Re: or else

Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 8:35 am
by Turxx
teflor the ranger wrote:
Turxx wrote:the problem with american healthcare is also what makes it great, and america great, its a business and business exists for making money, capitalism
if a person pays X amount for health insurance and the insurance company pays out X to the tenth for that same persons healthcare, who picks up the slack?
someone has to

People can buy their own insurance. It's not any more expensive than the row of Xbox games I've seen in folk's houses that tell me they can't afford insurance. Otherwise, there are plenty of free clinics and other private charities and resources for those who care enough to lift a finger in their own care.

what does that have to do with who picks up the slack if what they paid for insurance was less then what the insurance company paid out covering the policy?

Re: or else

Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 1:45 pm
by kiryan
I'm not missing the point, I'm exaggerating it.

Do I have the right to drink soda? If you can infringe on that right why not others?