The healthcare bill is so bad
sr
From: Turner, Trish
To:
Sent: Tue Dec 01 17:16:35 2009
Subject: URGENT: SenReid tries to exempt Congressional staffers from new
healthcare reform
I heard it would add 2,000 dollars to your Ins. premium!
Dave C.
You heard wrong. It's 5,000 dollars per year, or over 400 dollars per
month. -Dave
--
Dave C. <no...@nohow.never>
sr
"Dave C." <no...@nohow.never> wrote in message
news:20091201191438...@nohow.never...
Vic Smith
wrote:
With no "public option" you'll pay the insurance companies exactly
what they want, or go without. You might be used to that. I am.
Biggest change with no "public option" is the tax subsidies to the low
incomes will be more - and taxpayers will pay more money - to the
insurance companies.
The main idea is to get the uninsured numbers down, and that means gov
subsidies. Cost control is secondary. Try to do anything sensible
with that and the cry of "DEATH PANELS" rings out across the land.
Some say that using taxpayer money for folks to pay for private health
care insurance is socialism.
I say it's socialism for the private insurance companies.
Commies like that. But they call themselves "capitalists" so don't
worry about them. They just want your money - all of it if practical.
The table is being set. We'll see who gets invited for dinner.
--Vic
h
"Dave C." <no...@nohow.never> wrote in message
news:20091201191438...@nohow.never...
> "sr" <sol...@uninets.net> wrote:
to exempt Congressional staffers from
>> new healthcare reform
>>
>> to your Ins. premium!
>>
>>
>
> You heard wrong. It's 5,000 dollars per year, or over 400 dollars per
> month. -Dave
>
>
sr
"Vic Smith" <thismaila...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:rlkbh551uinbss63o...@4ax.com...
so the Govenment does it for him, so he can save "Face"
sr
> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Subject: URGENT: SenReid tries to exempt Congressional staffers from
>>> new healthcare reform
>>>
>>> http://gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com/look-who-gets-exempted/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogs%2FGretawire+%28FOXNews.com+-+Blogs+-+Gretawire%29&utm_content=Twitter
>>>
>>> I heard it would add 2,000 dollars to your Ins. premium!
>>>
>>>
>>
>>You heard wrong. It's 5,000 dollars per year, or over 400 dollars per
>>month. -Dave
>
> With no "public option" you'll pay the insurance companies exactly
> what they want, or go without. You might be used to that. I am.
> Biggest change with no "public option" is the tax subsidies to the low
> incomes will be more - and taxpayers will pay more money - to the
> insurance companies.
> The main idea is to get the uninsured numbers down, and that means gov
> subsidies. Cost control is secondary. Try to do anything sensible
> with that and the cry of "DEATH PANELS" rings out across the land.
> Some say that using taxpayer money for folks to pay for private health
> care insurance is socialism.
> I say it's socialism for the private insurance companies.
> Commies like that. But they call themselves "capitalists" so don't
> worry about them. They just want your money - all of it if practical.
> The table is being set. We'll see who gets invited for dinner.
>
> --Vic
clams_casino
>
>#1: The left does not create wealth; it redistributes it. Dennis Prager
>
>
>
>
Warren Buffet seems to make a lot of money.
Dave C.
> >
> > You heard wrong. It's 5,000 dollars per year, or over 400 dollars
> > per month. -Dave
> >
> >
> You actually believe ANYTHING coming from Faux News? Really? Wow,
> just wow.
>
You think the CBO would lie? They are good at way underestimating
costs. If they say it's an extra $5000 per year, I tend to believe that
is an optimistic estimate. (ouch) -Dave
Dave C.
"sr" <sol...@uninets.net> wrote:
> yes, I heard 5000 also, didn't know what criteria was so posted the
> lesser
>
Well, the bill was supposed to save about $2500 per year in insurance
premiums. But the CBO estimated it would INCREASE premiums by $5000
per year. The actual cost will likely be much higher. -Dave
Napoleon
<thismaila...@comcast.net> wrote:
>With no "public option" you'll pay the insurance companies exactly
>what they want, or go without.
Actually under this POS bill you don't have the option to go without.
You pay exactly what the insurance companies want PERIOD.
>Some say that using taxpayer money for folks to pay for private health
>care insurance is socialism.
>I say it's socialism for the private insurance companies.
Exactly. Facism more like it. As the Cultural Dictionary states
"Although both communism and fascism are forms of totalitarianism,
fascism does not demand state ownership of the means of production,
nor is fascism committed to the achievement of economic equality."
Sounds like the Grand Ole US of A. The government helping private
industry screw the "little people."
Dave C.
Napoleon <ana...@666yes.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 20:57:24 -0600, Vic Smith
> <thismaila...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >With no "public option" you'll pay the insurance companies exactly
> >what they want, or go without.
>
> Actually under this POS bill you don't have the option to go without.
> You pay exactly what the insurance companies want PERIOD.
It's worse than that, actually. You pay exactly what the insurance
companies want PERIOD, but for a higher level of coverage as specified
in the bill.
Everybody will have to switch plans from whatever they currently have,
to a much more expensive plan. (assuming you already have private
health insurance) -Dave
h
"Dave C." <no...@nohow.never> wrote in message
But that only applies to those making (what I think is) a lot of money.
Those of us who have been hammered by the economy will not be required to
buy insurance. We simply can't afford it and never will be able to. I make
too much for the state-subsidized plan ($200/year too much) and much too
little for the small-business-group to which I used to belong. They dumped
me because my business didn't earn enough the past few years, not that I
could have continued to pay the premiums anyway. Considering that I never
once reached my deductible (only used it once in 5 years) I paid everything
out of pocket anyway and flushed tens of thousands of $ down the drain,
paying for someone else to receive healthcare.
Bob F
Bob F
Gee. That's a little more than my insurance company increased my rates in
August. Since 9/2002, my rates went up 368%.
I'm sure most of the Health bill increase would be ralated to the inability of
the insurance companies to quit paying due to preexisting conditions, payment
caps, etc. thereby dumping sick people on the streets. It's been wonderful how
they could dump or avoid anyone that cost them money. So what if those people
then die.
Bob F
>
>>
>> #1: The left does not create wealth; it redistributes it. Dennis
>> Prager
Labor creates wealth. Capitalism redistributes it.
Rod Speed
>> sr wrote
>>> #1: The left does not create wealth; it redistributes it. Dennis Prager
> Labor creates wealth.
Mindlessly superficial.
> Capitalism redistributes it.
Even more mindlessly superficial.
Dave C.
> >
> > Everybody will have to switch plans from whatever they currently
> > have, to a much more expensive plan. (assuming you already have
> > private health insurance) -Dave
>
> But that only applies to those making (what I think is) a lot of
> money. Those of us who have been hammered by the economy will not be
> required to buy insurance.
You are confused. The only people NOT required to buy insurance under
the various bills being discussed is the people who are voting on the
bills. Unless you are a Senator (for example) YOU will be required to
buy insurance. If you can't vote on the bill, you will be required to
buy insurance when the bill passes.
> We simply can't afford it and never will
> be able to.
Then you will go to prison. I wish I'd made that up. But the penalty
for not being able to afford the mandatory insurance coverage is stiff
fines...and jail time.
> I make too much for the state-subsidized plan ($200/year
> too much) and much too little for the small-business-group to which I
> used to belong. They dumped me because my business didn't earn enough
> the past few years, not that I could have continued to pay the
> premiums anyway. Considering that I never once reached my deductible
> (only used it once in 5 years) I paid everything out of pocket anyway
> and flushed tens of thousands of $ down the drain, paying for someone
> else to receive healthcare.
That's one bad thing about current private health insurance. It
doesn't pay a damned thing. If you are over your sky-high deductible,
they just think up some bullshit excuse to deny the claim so that you
end up paying for everything (EVERYTHING) out of pocket.
However, as I've said before, the various bills being discussed are
definitely a step (or 20) in the wrong direction. -Dave
Napoleon
wrote:
>Then you will go to prison. I wish I'd made that up. But the penalty
>for not being able to afford the mandatory insurance coverage is stiff
>fines...and jail time.
Hey but your health insurance will be free in prison! When you get
there make sure you get your physical, cancer screenings and dental
checkups before they let you out.
>That's one bad thing about current private health insurance. It
>doesn't pay a damned thing. If you are over your sky-high deductible,
>they just think up some bullshit excuse to deny the claim so that you
>end up paying for everything (EVERYTHING) out of pocket.
Private health insurance has NOTHING to do with health care. Private
health insurance companies are there to make money, not cover your
medical bills. So what do you think they are going to do? I've put in
measly 65 dollar dental cleaning bills that WERE ALWAYS denied out of
hand 3 times before they would pay it. It's what they do. The SOP is
to deny, deny, deny and most people will give up and just pay the bill
themselves.
>However, as I've said before, the various bills being discussed are
>definitely a step (or 20) in the wrong direction. -Dave
The bills are total crap. Single payer Medicare for all is the ONLY
thing that will work, which is a guarantee we'll never see it in this
country. We can never do things that will work - hence Afganistan.
Dave C.
>
> The bills are total crap. Single payer Medicare for all is the ONLY
> thing that will work, which is a guarantee we'll never see it in this
> country. We can never do things that will work - hence Afganistan.
Medicare is going to be bankrupt in a few years. That's at current
funding levels for current subscribers. If you add hundreds of
millions of subscribers to medicare, nobody owns a calculator with
enough digits to calculate the cost of that. -Dave
--
Dave C. <no...@nohow.never>
h
"Dave C." <no...@nohow.never> wrote in message
>
>> >
>> > Everybody will have to switch plans from whatever they currently
>> > have, to a much more expensive plan. (assuming you already have
>> > private health insurance) -Dave
>>
>> But that only applies to those making (what I think is) a lot of
>> money. Those of us who have been hammered by the economy will not be
>> required to buy insurance.
>
> You are confused. The only people NOT required to buy insurance under
> the various bills being discussed is the people who are voting on the
> bills. Unless you are a Senator (for example) YOU will be required to
> buy insurance. If you can't vote on the bill, you will be required to
> buy insurance when the bill passes.
>
>> We simply can't afford it and never will
>> be able to.
>
> Then you will go to prison. I wish I'd made that up. But the penalty
> for not being able to afford the mandatory insurance coverage is stiff
> fines...and jail time.
Paranoid much? The actual proposals read pretty much like the MA current
laws, and under those (I don't live in MA) I would NOT have to buy
insurance. Even those who fail to buy it and can "afford it" (according to
the state) only pay a tax of less than $800 year. Jail time, are you insane?
PLONK!
h
"Napoleon" <ana...@666yes.net> wrote in message
news:ttefh5pctrvbhjssu...@4ax.com...
Bing, bing, bing we have a winner!
Napoleon
wrote:
>Medicare is going to be bankrupt in a few years. That's at current
>funding levels for current subscribers. If you add hundreds of
>millions of subscribers to medicare, nobody owns a calculator with
>enough digits to calculate the cost of that. -Dave
You raise taxes to pay for it.
As you should to pay for the WARS! But people don't understand that.
They think everything is free. What's wrong with paying your OWN tax
money for your OWN health benefits? But Americans would rather send
their tax money for imperialistic global wars (or should I say to
China who funds our wars). Makes so much sense.
Samatha Hill -- take out TRASH to reply
>
> The bills are total crap. Single payer Medicare for all is the ONLY
> thing that will work, which is a guarantee we'll never see it in this
> country. We can never do things that will work - hence Afganistan.
Single-payer Medicare will be a bad deal for the doctors because of
their refusal to allow you to submit a bill that wasn't technically AND
cosmetically perfect (read: the printer printed on or over the OCR box)
the first time.
Samatha Hill -- take out TRASH to reply
>
> Medicare is going to be bankrupt in a few years. That's at current
> funding levels for current subscribers. If you add hundreds of
> millions of subscribers to medicare, nobody owns a calculator with
> enough digits to calculate the cost of that. -Dave
Nah, you charge them on a sliding scale based on income.
I think the bottom line here is, who is going to pay for expensive,
high-tech medical care?
Rod Speed
> Dave C. wrote
>> Medicare is going to be bankrupt in a few years. That's at current
>> funding levels for current subscribers. If you add hundreds of
>> millions of subscribers to medicare, nobody owns a calculator with
>> enough digits to calculate the cost of that.
> Nah, you charge them on a sliding scale based on income.
> I think the bottom line here is, who is going to pay for expensive,
> high-tech medical care?
The same ones that always do, those who dont have serious medical problems.
SMS
> Paranoid much? The actual proposals read pretty much like the MA current
> laws, and under those (I don't live in MA) I would NOT have to buy
> insurance. Even those who fail to buy it and can "afford it" (according to
> the state) only pay a tax of less than $800 year. Jail time, are you insane?
He believes Faux News, as close to insane as you can get!
Rod Speed
>> The bills are total crap. Single payer Medicare for all is the ONLY
>> thing that will work, which is a guarantee we'll never see it in this
>> country. We can never do things that will work - hence Afganistan.
> Medicare is going to be bankrupt in a few years.
Fools have been claiming that for decades now.
> That's at current funding levels for current subscribers. If you add
> hundreds of millions of subscribers to medicare, nobody owns a
> calculator with enough digits to calculate the cost of that.
Another lie. The US spends TWICE the percentage of GDP on health care
that anywhere else in the entire world does, so universal medicare WOULD
COST MUCH LESS THAN THE CURRENT INSURANCE SYSTEM DOES.
Rod Speed
>>> Everybody will have to switch plans from whatever they currently
>>> have, to a much more expensive plan. (assuming you already have
>>> private health insurance) -Dave
>>
>> But that only applies to those making (what I think is) a lot of
>> money. Those of us who have been hammered by the economy will not be
>> required to buy insurance.
>
> You are confused. The only people NOT required to buy insurance under
> the various bills being discussed is the people who are voting on the
> bills. Unless you are a Senator (for example) YOU will be required to
> buy insurance. If you can't vote on the bill, you will be required to
> buy insurance when the bill passes.
>
>> We simply can't afford it and never will
>> be able to.
>
> Then you will go to prison. I wish I'd made that up. But the penalty
> for not being able to afford the mandatory insurance coverage is stiff
> fines...and jail time.
Another lie, just like it is with the current manditory insurance for cars.
>> I make too much for the state-subsidized plan ($200/year
>> too much) and much too little for the small-business-group to which I
>> used to belong. They dumped me because my business didn't earn enough
>> the past few years, not that I could have continued to pay the
>> premiums anyway. Considering that I never once reached my deductible
>> (only used it once in 5 years) I paid everything out of pocket anyway
>> and flushed tens of thousands of $ down the drain, paying for someone
>> else to receive healthcare.
>
> That's one bad thing about current private health insurance. It
> doesn't pay a damned thing. If you are over your sky-high deductible,
> they just think up some bullshit excuse to deny the claim so that you
> end up paying for everything (EVERYTHING) out of pocket.
> However, as I've said before, the various bills being discussed
> are definitely a step (or 20) in the wrong direction.
Easy to claim. Have fun actually substantiating that claim.
h
"SMS" <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4b1806ab$0$1598$742e...@news.sonic.net...
Ah, of course :)
Dave C.
> > Then you will go to prison. I wish I'd made that up. But the
> > penalty for not being able to afford the mandatory insurance
> > coverage is stiff fines...and jail time.
>
> Another lie, just like it is with the current manditory insurance for
> cars.
>
>
It's not a lie. That's actually in the bill that the House passed. If
you can't afford the new mandatory health insurance, you will pay a
fine that you also can't afford. Or you will go to jail. -Dave
Dave C.
> >
> > Then you will go to prison. I wish I'd made that up. But the
> > penalty for not being able to afford the mandatory insurance
> > coverage is stiff fines...and jail time.
>
> Paranoid much? The actual proposals read pretty much like the MA
> current laws, and under those (I don't live in MA) I would NOT have
> to buy insurance. Even those who fail to buy it and can "afford
> it" (according to the state) only pay a tax of less than $800 year.
> Jail time, are you insane? PLONK!
You're asking me if I'm insane? I didn't write the bill, and I didn't
vote on it. I'm just informing you about some of what's in it. And
what's in it is definitely insane. But it does you no good to call me
insane for pointing out that the bill is insane. -Dave
Dave C.
>
> Another lie. The US spends TWICE the percentage of GDP on health care
> that anywhere else in the entire world does, so universal medicare
> WOULD COST MUCH LESS THAN THE CURRENT INSURANCE SYSTEM DOES.
That must be that famous government efficiency at work, eh? -Dave
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Dave C. wrote
>>>> The bills are total crap. Single payer Medicare for all is the ONLY
>>>> thing that will work, which is a guarantee we'll never see it in this
>>>> country. We can never do things that will work - hence Afganistan.
>>> Medicare is going to be bankrupt in a few years.
>> Fools have been claiming that for decades now.
>>> That's at current funding levels for current subscribers. If you add
>>> hundreds of millions of subscribers to medicare, nobody owns a
>>> calculator with enough digits to calculate the cost of that.
>> Another lie. The US spends TWICE the percentage of GDP on health
Nope, just avoiding the cost of all those paper shuffling apes in the insurance system and
the other stuff like advertising etc thats no longer needed with a single payer system.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Dave C. wrote
>>> Then you will go to prison. I wish I'd made that up.
>>> But the penalty for not being able to afford the mandatory
>>> insurance coverage is stiff fines...and jail time.
>> Another lie, just like it is with the current manditory insurance for cars.
> It's not a lie.
Corse its a lie.
> That's actually in the bill that the House passed.
Pity that aint what the CONGRESS passed, so aint law.
> If you can't afford the new mandatory health insurance,
> you will pay a fine that you also can't afford.
Another lie. There is quite explicit provision for those who cannot afford to pay.
> Or you will go to jail.
Doesnt say that either, you silly little pathological liar.
Cindy Hamilton
The wife of a co-worker is a doctor. He reports that she says that
insurance company
paperwork is ten times more onerous than the Medicare forms. If we
had single-payer,
privately delivered health care, doctors' offices could reduce their
staffing because they
wouldn't need so many paper pushers.
Cindy Hamilton
h
"Cindy Hamilton" <angelica...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:58e2419c-98d2-4451...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
Yup. When I lived in England (as a foreign student, not a resident) I had to
see a dentist to replace a filling. His wife was the only non-medical
provider in the office and her job was to schedule appointments and file
charts. She had enough time to spare that she kept the appointments for the
GP whose office was across the hall. He didn't have ANY non-medical
providers working for him. Didn't need them. Show a card, get fixed up. She
said I was the only cash customer (since I was a non-covered foreigner)
they'd had all year, and it was November. Oh, and the filling was completed
same day I called and it cost less than the original had cost in the USA,
since I only had to pay what the National Health system pays. Yeah, single
payer makes things more expensive, right.
zxcvbob
sr
"zxcvbob" <zxc...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:7nt77eF...@mid.individual.net...
> How bad is it? ;-)
-----We The People USA
Citizens Dedicated To Preserving Our Constitutional Republic
Supreme Court Has said that Congress Cannot control the Practice of
Medicine.
in Health Care Reform
Supreme Court Has said that Congress Cannot control the Practice of
Medicine.
Supreme court has said that Congress cannot control the practice of
medicine.
The Supreme Court has already spoken out against Congress making universal
health care the law of the land. Direct control of medical practice is
beyond the power of the federal government.
This is a decision of the Supreme Court, decided April 13, 1925, Linder vs.
the United States.
Then there is this case decided in 1926 that said, "Congress, therefore
cannot directly restrict the professional judgment of the physician or
interfere with its free exercise in the treatment of disease, Lambert vs.
Yellow.
You could look at Oregon vs. Ashcroft in 2004 or Conant vs. Walters in 2002.
However, they all give similar judgments restricting congress's authority
over medicine and making it clear that the states have this right not
congress. What is being debated in Congress right now is direct control and
therefore beyond the power of congress to enact. Let's flood the senate with
this information, call, email or fax them and tell them they cannot do this.
taken from WETHEPEOPLE
sr
proposing this, the people's party
==============
I think it is 5,000 and a year jail.
---------
The only way out, is if you are an illegal, illegals get away with a lot,
you are better off being an illegal in America than
being a citizen. Laws do not apply to illegals like they do to the
citizens, if you have noticed?.
=========
"h" <tmc...@searchmachine.com> wrote in message
news:hf8ijo$d1d$1...@aioe.org...
sr
"Cindy Hamilton" <angelica...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:58e2419c-98d2-4451...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
Cindy Hamilton
======Crap, most of the doctors here will not take medicare clients, any
longer, they don't get reimbursed,if they do it isn't up to private pay. and
they complained, too much paper work, and there is so much regulations that
they can't give the best in their judgement.
Even the Hospitals got gipped. What will happen is, the employers will stop
carrying private insurance and just let the Government
take care of it, because Govenment doesn't have to play by the rules it sets
for the rest of society. And Government can make money out of air, unlike
the private sector
George
Trusted family member manages the backend of a large local practice. She
says the absolute biggest hassle and most complicated by far are the
government programs.
Samatha Hill -- take out TRASH to reply
>
> Trusted family member manages the backend of a large local practice. She
> says the absolute biggest hassle and most complicated by far are the
> government programs.
I sit next to the biller at the doctor's office I work for, and our
opinion is that they are both awful, but for different reasons.
sr
You are showing your ignorance with each sentence you post on this
subject
Even our legislators do not know what is in this Bill, however, people that
are studing this bill,
are telling us, this is going to raise premiums, less coverage, more
regulations, less individual control,
Jail Time, Fines, and Medicare cuts for the old people.
Illegals will be covered, and much much more. None good.
the most telling: lawmakers do not want to be included.
Car ins. is not a good example. We choose to buy cars, We have no choice
with this ins.
there is no choice, no wiggle room. If we did not want to buy car ins. we
would not buy a car.so,
there is a choice. With personal insurance, it is mandatory with
regulations, and much much more
when wearing the YOKE put around our necks by the Liberals
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7nqhbrF...@mid.individual.net...
sr
You are in another country, so your voice isn't going to count for much
sr
How's that healthcare looking? http://bit.ly/1FeD8p
"Napoleon" <ana...@666yes.net> wrote in message
news:akjfh59q6fvj8akjp...@4ax.com...
sr
Rod Speed
> Rod, you know NOT of which you speak
We'll see...
> You are showing your ignorance with each sentence you post on this subject
And you keep lying to your teeth.
> Even our legislators do not know what is in this Bill,
Anyone can read it.
> however, people that are studing this bill, are telling us, this is going to raise premiums, less coverage,
That is a lie. Just the requirement to have insurance means MORE coverage, fool.
> more regulations, less individual control,
Another lie. You end up with MORE individual control when you get to
choose the public option in addition to the current options available to you.
> Jail Time, Fines,
Another lie. Thats just the HOUSE bill. You dont know that that will end up in
the merged bills or even that any merged bill will get thru the congress either.
> and Medicare cuts for the old people.
Another lie. The bill says nothing even remotely resembling anything like that.
> Illegals will be covered,
Another lie. The bill says nothing even remotely resembling anything like that.
> and much much more. None good.
Another bare faced lie.
> the most telling: lawmakers do not want to be included.
They arent in medicare either. It works anyway, fool.
> Car ins. is not a good example.
Wrong, as always.
> We choose to buy cars, We have no choice with this ins.
You have no choice with car insurance if you have a car on the road, fool.
> there is no choice, no wiggle room.
Corse there is, you can leave the country, fool.
> If we did not want to buy car ins. we would not buy a car.so, there is a choice. With personal insurance, it is
> mandatory with regulations,
Nof if you leave the country, fool.
> and much much more when wearing the YOKE put around our necks by the Liberals
Just like social security and medicare and taxes are, fool.
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> Dave C. wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Dave C. wrote
>>>>> Then you will go to prison. I wish I'd made that up.
>>>>> But the penalty for not being able to afford the mandatory
>>>>> insurance coverage is stiff fines...and jail time.
>>>> Another lie, just like it is with the current manditory insurance for cars.
>>> It's not a lie.
>> Corse its a lie.
>>> That's actually in the bill that the House passed.
>> Pity that aint what the CONGRESS passed, so aint law.
>>> If you can't afford the new mandatory health insurance,
>>> you will pay a fine that you also can't afford.
>> Another lie. There is quite explicit provision for those who cannot afford to pay.
>>> Or you will go to jail.
>> Doesnt say that either, you silly little pathological liar.
> It does say in our news letter in big letters, Jail time .
Just because some fool claims something, doesnt make it gospel, fool.
Thats just the HOUSE bill, it aint what will get thru congress, if anything does, fool.
And those who cannot afford the insurance DONT GO TO JAIL EVEN IN THE HOUSE BILL, FOOL.
sr
"sr" <sol...@uninets.net> wrote in message
news:5dedf$4b19ec5c$ccb5843b$12...@ispn.net...
>
DEADLY DOCTORS
O ADVISERS WANT TO RATION CARE
By BETSY MCCAUGHEY
Read more:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/item_PU6S0iok2FbS368B7d7mAM#ixzz0Yw9H969g
Rod Speed
Just because some fool claims something, doesnt make it gospel, stupid.
Cindy Hamilton
Thank you. That's the most sensible thing anybody has said on the
subject.
Cindy Hamilton
sr
sr
what is to come in Health Care
By Alison Young, USA TODAY
When the swine flu vaccine was most scarce, health officials gave thousands
of doses to corporate clinics at Walt Disney World, Toyota, defense
contractors, oil companies and cruise lines, according to a USA TODAY review
of vaccine distribution data from three states.
USA TODAY examined how state health departments distributed H1N1 vaccine
after public outcry last month over Wall Street firms such as Goldman Sachs
receiving doses while doctors and hospitals encountered shortages. The data
show other companies got the vaccine in October and early November. In some
cases, early doses went to people not deemed most at risk by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention.
"Now we have evidence of what my suspicions were," said U.S. Rep. Frank
Pallone, D-N.J., chair of a House health subcommittee. "I'm afraid when you
have these corporate initiatives, it's not primarily needs-based."
Pallone said he would send the CDC a letter Tuesday asking it to revise
guidelines to states on the use of corporate health clinics.
Each state health department must decide how to provide the vaccine to
people most at risk, and employers are a legitimate venue, said Anne
Schuchat, the CDC's immunization director. CDC's priority groups include
pregnant women, people with chronic health conditions, health care workers
and people ages 6 months to 24 years. "This is much less about what you do
for a living and much more about how do you get the vaccine in the path of
those target populations," she said.
The Toyota Family Health Center in San Antonio, which got 2,120 doses,
initially focused on the CDC's priority groups, but since Nov. 16 has
offered the vaccine to any employee, contractor or family member, spokesman
Craig Mullenbach said.
SWINE FLU CENTRAL: News, video, interactive map of CDC data
YOUR GUIDE: Getting through the season unscathed
Q&A: Where can you get vaccine shots?
Norwegian Cruise Line in Miami used its 300 doses "to vaccinate critical
on-board staff on our ships," spokeswoman AnneMarie Mathews said. She said
recipients included medical staff, youth counselors and "key officers
responsible for the safe operation of the vessel" but did not address how
they fit into CDC's priority groups.
Of the 2.42 million doses in Texas and 2 million in Florida distributed
through mid-November, fewer than 1% went to employers, according to USA
TODAY's analysis of data obtained under state open-records acts. Thousands
of registered providers - doctors, hospitals, schools, pharmacies - in Texas
alone got no doses in that period.
Among companies that requested and received early doses and say they
administered them to high-risk people:
. Florida: Walt Disney World got 2,200 doses for college-age theme park
workers and members of its 100-person medical team. Universal Orlando Resort
got 100 doses.
. Texas: Defense contractors Bell Helicopter got 100 doses and Lockheed
Martin Aeronautics, 80. Chevron got 190; ExxonMobil, 160; Dow Chemical, 170;
ConocoPhillips, 110.
. Georgia: No doses went to companies. Ravae Graham of the state health
department said people in the priority groups "are typically only a small
fraction of workers in the corporate sector."
California, New York and New York City are still deciding whether to release
data to USA TODAY.
Corporate clout played no role, health officials said. "We're not playing
favorites with Disney," said Dain Weister of the Orange County (Fla.) Health
Department.
Carrie Williams of the Texas health department said, "We've been doing the
very best we can to fairly distribute the vaccine to a wide variety of
providers."
Complicating distribution decisions: Not all forms of vaccine are
appropriate for all people. Nasal spray can be used only by healthy people
and health care workers, and shots come in different doses.
"The question we have to ask on these corporate ones is: Did at-risk people
receive the doses? Or was corporate America buying their way out of an
illness?" asked Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., who chairs a House oversight
subcommittee. "You've almost got to look at them on a case-by-case basis."
Melanie Sloan, executive director of the watchdog group Citizens for
Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said there's no assurance that
companies used the doses properly: "Everything is on the honor system," she
said.
Contributing: Paul Overberg
Rod Speed
> Cindy Hamilton must be on the Gov. Dole
More of your pathological lying.
> Cindy Hamilton <angelica...@yahoo.com> wrote
Rod Speed
> "sr" <sol...@uninets.net> wrote in message
> news:1ac11$4b1b5485$ccb58410$12...@ispn.net...
>>
>> "SMS" <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote in message
>> news:4b1806ab$0$1598$742e...@news.sonic.net...
>>> h wrote:
>>>
>>>> Paranoid much? The actual proposals read pretty much like the MA
>>>> current laws, and under those (I don't live in MA) I would NOT
>>>> have to buy insurance. Even those who fail to buy it and can
>>>> "afford it" (according to the state) only pay a tax of less than
>>>> $800 year. Jail time, are you insane?
>>>
>>> He believes Faux News, as close to insane as you can get!
>> Not just Fox, local papers are giving us the facts
>
> what is to come in Health Care
>
> By Alison Young, USA TODAY
> When the swine flu vaccine was most scarce, health officials gave
> thousands of doses to corporate clinics at Walt Disney World, Toyota,
> defense contractors, oil companies and cruise lines, according to a
> USA TODAY review of vaccine distribution data from three states.
And even someone as stupid as you should have noticed that that is the current system.
Cindy Hamilton
> Cindy Hamilton must be on the Gov. Dole
I'm enjoying my 31st consecutive year of employment.
Cindy Hamilton
Nick Naim
> to exempt Congressional Staffers from new healthcare reform bill
>
> From: Turner, Trish
>
> To:
>
> Sent: Tue Dec 01 17:16:35 2009
>
> Subject: URGENT: SenReid tries to exempt Congressional staffers from new
> healthcare reform
>
> http://gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com/look-who-gets-exempted/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogs%2FGretawire+%28FOXNews.com+-+Blogs+-+Gretawire%29&utm_content=Twitter
>
> I heard it would add 2,000 dollars to your Ins. premium!
> .JFC some of a bitch .................................
NO United States Citizen making under $100,000 per year CAN afford health
insurence premium payments
Just go to the fcking hospital if you have problem like i do.
They will take you in...............
>
Rod Speed
And then bankrupt you when you have a serious medical problem.