Canada's premier medical journal

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by Light

Ferd you talk about a liar. The AFF's resident right wing wacko and the jerk in the video are two peas in a pod. both are bald face liars.
You know the Republicans have had control of both houses for 12 years and the white house for the last 8 and and to my knowledge there has been no health care bill so don't say the republicans are for heath care.
The only health care they care about is their own.

Light we certainly dont agree on political matters. That is for sure. but I dont think it is accurate to say I am a bald faced liar.

If you think Ive told a whopper, point it out. lets discuss it.

I thought Mike told one. I pointed out not only what I thought of his statement but offered facts to back my position.


but since Mike wants to suggest that Republicansh havent done anything in the last 12 years, lets review that too.

In the last 12 years repbublicans passed some legislation that allowed the creation of Health Savings Accounts. This allows an individual to save money tax free and spend that money tax free on medical issues. Everything from drugs to dr visits to insurance premiums.

The republicans did try several reforms including Tort reform but were stopped dead by the democrats (remember you have to have 60 votes in the senate to pass anything).

Not only did the Dems stop any legislation to reform healthcare in the last 8 years, but they also made it quite clear (from nancy pelosi's lips) that they would not offer alternaitives.

Now the shoe is on the other foot. Dems are tying to pass legislation and republicans are blocking. Lets say the dems before and the republicans now are doing so on principle.

Lets say back then the dems thought the repbulicans options were bad ones and now the republicans think the dems options are bad ones.

But at least the republicans are trying to engage. They have offered several very extensive bills filled with things the CBO says would help. But even still, they have been blocked from the process by the democrat leadership. There isnt even an attempt to compromise in the House. The Senate seems a bit more willing to find common ground but the House seems bent of passing a democrat bill that would be untinable to repbublicans.

The charge here is that republicans are saying nothing is wrong and that republicans dont want to do anything to fix the problem.

That isnt true and it doesnt match the facts, Light. The facts are Republicans are saying that there are problems and we need to fix those problems. But they are also saying that a massive top down approach will create more problems than it solves and that is exactly what the dems are proposing.

Lets stop with the "republicans dont want to fix this" nonsense and talk about the real issues.

I am more than happy to have a debate about what way forward would be better but I am not going to stand by and let Mike or you say that repbulicans simply dont want to fix healthcare.

That is certainly not a lie.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Ferd

Light we certainly dont agree on political matters. That is for sure. but I dont think it is accurate to say I am a bald faced liar.

If you think Ive told a whopper, point it out. lets discuss it.

Ferd let me say it LOUD and CLEAR I have never read or even heard where you have lied. You are not AFF'S resident loonie.
Of all of the Republicans that post on this forum you and Baron are the two I respect as honest and trustworthy. .

[Light]

Originally Posted by Ferd

In the last 12 years repbublicans passed some legislation that allowed the creation of Health Savings Accounts. This allows an individual to save money tax free and spend that money tax free on medical issues. Everything from drugs to dr visits to insurance premiums.

Ferd Explain in dollars and cents how this would help the average working man in Texas? The median income in Texas for 2005 through 2007 was $44,861.00 BTW that's $5,040.00 below the average for the rest of the US. Make's sense as Tx. is a right to work state.

[MikeinAR]

Originally Posted by Light

Ferd Explain in dollars and cents how this would help the average working man in Texas? The median income in Texas for 2005 through 2007 was $44,861.00 BTW that's $5,040.00 below the average for the rest of the US. Make's sense as Tx. is a right to work state.

I'm not sure I understand either. People who can't afford to pay high insurance premiums aren't going to be able to "save up" enough money to pay for even a week hospital stay and a couple of diagnostic tests.

My wife and I have a health savings account and it's great to help with deductibles and co-pays but it wouldn't be the first drop in the bucket to helping the millions of uninsured people in this country. That's the problem on the table.

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by Light

Ferd let me say it LOUD and CLEAR I have never read or even heard where you have lied. You are not AFF'S resident loonie.
Of all of the Republicans that post on this forum you and Baron are the two I respect as honest and trustworthy. .

ahh.... i miss read you.... sorry about that, I certainly respect you a great deal, though we have been known to "go our rounds" so to speak....


I dont think we disagree on AFFs err... hum... well... you know what I mean! LOL!

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by Light

Ferd Explain in dollars and cents how this would help the average working man in Texas? The median income in Texas for 2005 through 2007 was $44,861.00 BTW that's $5,040.00 below the average for the rest of the US. Make's sense as Tx. is a right to work state.

I dont think I suggested it was a cure-all.

The statement was that republicans had done nothing. I provided actual proof that the statement was factually incorrect.

I have one. It saves me 25% on the dollars not taxed as that is my tax bracket. (I am a bit ahead of the texes dedian income)

This is a drop in the bucket. But since you bring it up, one of the market based ideas being put forth by republicans is to expand on this and for those who truely cannot afford insurance, they would recieve tax rebates directly linked to HSA's so they could (would have to) use those dollars to purchase their own insurance.

The CBO states this would inssure more that 15 million of the poorest Americans at a cost far below what is being proposed by the government option. Further they state that we could use income from the TARP funds to pay for this proposal and that would mean the plan would be budget nutral.

I think it is brilliant and vastly better than any kind of public option. But the dems wont give this the light of day.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Ferd

I dont think I suggested it was a cure-all.

The statement was that republicans had done nothing. I provided actual proof that the statement was factually incorrect.

I have one. It saves me 25% on the dollars not taxed as that is my tax bracket. (I am a bit ahead of the texes dedian income)

This is a drop in the bucket. But since you bring it up, one of the market based ideas being put forth by republicans is to expand on this and for those who truely cannot afford insurance, they would recieve tax rebates directly linked to HSA's so they could (would have to) use those dollars to purchase their own insurance.

The CBO states this would inssure more that 15 million of the poorest Americans at a cost far below what is being proposed by the government option. Further they state that we could use income from the TARP funds to pay for this proposal and that would mean the plan would be budget nutral.

I think it is brilliant and vastly better than any kind of public option. But the dems wont give this the light of day.

Will a health savings account pay for the medical bill for someone like my father who suffered with bone cancer for 5 years in the hospital for weeks at a time?

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by Light

Will a health savings account pay for the medical bill for someone like my father who suffered with bone cancer for 5 years in the hospital for weeks at a time?

That depends on the type of insurance a person has. The HSA allows you to save money without tax burden. the bill in question, would see gov. put money in a persons HSA. At that point it is there money but can only be spent on medical care.


I dont know exact numbers but lets say the gov. put 5k in a HSA and allowed you to save up to 3K but maybe you cant save any.

you buy a policy with a $1000 deductable and have an out of pocket of $5000 and it cost you $2400 for the insurance.

so now you have a big year, you are out $5000 but the HSA had $2600 in it. so your actual out of pocket for the year is $2400

It might take you a couple of years to pay that off but it is better than no insurance

and

in my opinion it is vastly better than the government being involved in your medical decisions.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Ferd

That depends on the type of insurance a person has. The HSA allows you to save money without tax burden. the bill in question, would see gov. put money in a persons HSA. At that point it is there money but can only be spent on medical care.


I dont know exact numbers but lets say the gov. put 5k in a HSA and allowed you to save up to 3K but maybe you cant save any.

you buy a policy with a $1000 deductable and have an out of pocket of $5000 and it cost you $2400 for the insurance.

so now you have a big year, you are out $5000 but the HSA had $2600 in it. so your actual out of pocket for the year is $2400

It might take you a couple of years to pay that off but it is better than no insurance

and

in my opinion it is vastly better than the government being involved in your medical decisions.

Yet you will allow a greedy CEO and his bean counter be involved in your medical decisions.

Here again is what the greedy CEO does. He refuses to pay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_MvNF2GUE0

I have been on Medicare now for two years and not one time has someone from the government stepped between me and my doctor. I had what is considered elective surgery by many ins. company's on may eye lids last March. Medicare paid 80 % and my supplement ins paid the rest. My total out of pocket was $30.00 for the Hospital and $10.00 for the doctor.
Medicare cost is $ 96.00 per person a month. Not bad for a government run ins.

[MikeinAR]

Originally Posted by Light

Yet you will allow a greedy CEO and his bean counter be involved in your medical decisions.

Here again is what the greedy CEO does. He refuses to pay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_MvNF2GUE0

I have been on Medicare now for two years and not one time has someone from the government stepped between me and my doctor. I had what is considered elective surgery by many ins. company's on may eye lids last March. Medicare paid 80 % and my supplement ins paid the rest. My total out of pocket was $30.00 for the Hospital and $10.00 for the doctor.
Medicare cost is $ 96.00 per person a month. Not bad for a government run ins.

That's one part of this whole debate that really bothers me. Healthcare is rationed in this country as we speak. Insurance companies do it daily to millions of people.

When I see these people at town hall meetings and on TV ranting about not letting the gov't ration healthcare, I think what rock have you been under.