Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

[Cj Tari]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

man, again, you are just gold, like i said before if you want to keep on with the word game be my guess, if you listen closely Obama says, "aarp supports our plan" which was true, he never uses the word endorsement, or anything similar to that, but hell, im done with you, you are just ridiculous man, i mean, when i said "your buddy Glen Beck" i was being sarcastic, but hey, sometimes i guess i should blame my self for trying to have a civilized argument with someone as stuborn as you.

also, this is just plain dumb: "They said they were for health care reform but never Obama's plan." im probably missing something, and maybe the republicans are pushing a "healthcare plans" of their own, or maybe theres a couple more "healthcare plans" rolling around in congress that nobody in the world knew about except you. How pathetic are you, please just look at the videos, i mean, if you just follow the glen beck video, there is a bunch of them where the AARP people are refering directly to Obamas plan, but hey, you know what, you can always just ignore my posts, and everybody elses posts for that matter, since youre always right.

it has been great having somekind of discussion with rational people like Miro, Yao, Toasty and a lot of the people that often wonder in here, but you RM, no sir, you are just somekind of child like conspiracy preacher who cannot grasp the fact that not everything that he knows is true.

cheers and im done with this topic.

[floridaorange]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

oh f*ck it, nm

[Yao]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

its always like that though...the aim is to put the people with the initiative on the defensive.

I know, and the problem I have with this is that the depth has been taken out of the discussion. If politics starts revolving around image and the biggest mouth, you can be assured that what you get is NOT the best solution to your problem, but the worst part of it is that people in general are plain stupid and don't even stop to consider the 'arguments' brought to the table.

A real pragmatist will be able to see the wisdom in some proposals from the opposite party while in general adhering to the values of his/her own party. I don't see that happening too much right now. The same is happening here in The Netherlands, where especially the leftist politicians and supporters are as we speak digging themselves in into their own rainbow coloured rhetorics, ignoring the realities as we face them today. They are even accusing one politician here of being fascist, a nazi and the mirror image of Hitler himself, while it is at this point the leftist parties here that are increasingly behaving themselves fascist towards their critics. It makes me wanna puke.

[floridaorange]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

I know, and the problem I have with this is that the depth has been taken out of the discussion. If politics starts revolving around image and the biggest mouth, you can be assured that what you get is NOT the best solution to your problem, but the worst part of it is that people in general are plain stupid and don't even stop to consider the 'arguments' brought to the table.

Well said, I would also add that healthcare is a touchy subject as 100% of people have been negatively affected by health insurance at least once in their lives, with some incidents being much worse than others, either way everyone has been affected by our system here in the US, and everyone is therefore an "expert" on the subject.

Hopefully we end up with something that is genuinely useful after it's all said and done, because according to all of the reports, if we don't overhaul things now, we're in deep you-know-what in 10 years as a nation .

[chuckc]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

With polls showing seniors are the most skeptical about the health care reform bills working their way through Congress, President Barack Obama tried to ease some of their concerns during a town hall meeting with a little high-powered name-dropping.
The name: AARP.
Several times at the town hall in Portsmouth, N.H., on Aug. 11, Obama specifically mentioned AARP's support for health care reform. It's little wonder why: The AARP is the country's largest and most powerful advocate for seniors.
"We have the AARP on board because they know this is a good deal for our seniors," Obama said. Later, in response to a question about whether the health care plan would reduce the availability of medications through Medicare, Obama said, "Well, first of all, another myth that we've been hearing about is this notion that somehow we're going to be cutting your Medicare benefits. We are not. AARP would not be endorsing a bill if it was undermining Medicare, okay?"
It was that last comment that caught the attention of AARP executives. Not the part that AARP would not support a bill that undermines Medicare benefits. That's true. It was the suggestion that AARP had formally endorsed any particular version of the still-evolving health care plan.
AARP chief operating officer Tom Nelson immediately fired off a press release saying: "Indications that we have endorsed any of the major health care reform bills currently under consideration in Congress are inaccurate."
The rebuke likely confused a lot of AARP members who have read or heard numerous AARP statements in recent weeks that have supported various aspects of the health care plan.
Just a few weeks ago, on July 14, the AARP issued a news release gushing about the introduction of the House health care reform bill, saying: "This bill would make great strides for all of our members and their families." The group said it was pleased with the legislation for giving "every American access to affordable, quality health care choices."
Specifically, the release said the bill would make prescription drugs less expensive for seniors, would block insurance companies from denying coverage based on age and would cap out-of-pocket expenses for some insurance plans. AARP did not explicitly say it was endorsing the bill, but there was not a single negative comment in the statement.
In a July 14 ad sponsored by Healthy Economy Now, a coalition including AARP, the American Medical Association and the pharmaceutical industry, among others, the tone was decidedly upbeat. "The president and Congress have a plan to lower costs and stop denials for pre-existing conditions," the ad says. "It's time to act."
The following day, AARP released a statement about the version of the bill being debated in the Senate. This time, the group was slightly less complimentary; while it said most parts of the legislation were good, AARP remained concerned about a provision in the bill that would prevent some generic drugs from entering the market faster.
Since then, the climate in the health care debate has taken a nasty turn, with a deep and clear divide between Republicans and Democrats. But AARP spokesman Jim Dau said AARP was not reacting by tempering its stance.
He said AARP supports a lot of changes that both the House and Senate bills would make, such as making drugs cheaper for seniors and ending discriminatory practices against the elderly, but the group has been clear all along that it has not endorsed any of the big bills.
"We have endorsed specific measures," Dau said. "We're praising the pieces that we think are good for members."
Dau pointed to a statement made by AARP CEO Barry Rand during a July 28 town hall meeting with Obama.
"I want to make it clear that AARP has not endorsed any particular bill, any of the bills that are being circulated around Congress today and debated in Congress today," Rand said. "We continue to work with the members on both sides of the aisle, and we continue to work with the administration to achieve what is right for health care reform."
Nelson echoed that bipartisan tone in his statement after Obama's town hall this week.
"AARP has been working with Democrats and Republicans to fix our broken health care system," Nelson stated.
"AARP supports specific measures that would help older Americans and their families – including bipartisan proposals to create a new followup care benefit in Medicare that would help prevent hospital readmissions, as well as to address the Medicare prescription drug coverage gap known as the 'doughnut hole.' We also support the need for lawmakers and the administration to act this year to fix what doesn't work in the health care system."
So was Obama incorrect to say the AARP had endorsed the bill?
The July 14 statement sure sounds to us like an endorsement, even if it didn't specifically contain that word. But in Washington, the word "endorse" means you have put the weight of your name behind an official stamp of approval for a bill, candidate or policy.
And the fact is, AARP has not formally endorsed any specific bill. It strongly supports some aspects of the bills. But that's not a formal endorsement. And in fact, Obama was present two weeks ago when AARP's CEO said the group "has not endorsed any particular bill." So we rate Obama's statement Barely True.

The statement
"AARP would not be endorsing a bill if it was undermining Medicare, okay?"
Barack Obama, on Tuesday in a town hall on health care
The ruling
AARP has not formally endorsed any specific bill. It strongly supports some aspects of the bills. But that's not a formal endorsement.

[Yao]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

I hope so too Florida ;-). Admitted, even though we have a half-decent system here in the Netherlands, nothing is perfect -I guess it's all about the right balance. What strikes me as idiotic in my country though is that having (and paying for) at least basic health insurance is mandatory by law here, but at the same time it is a commercial service and therefore subject to market considerations, which means the amount by which rates increase are in my opinion outrageous. Besides the basic package which does cover your doctor, hospital expenses and medication (basic medical treatment, no luxury stuff) one can also opt to expand coverage with packages that provide various options –most of those are tailored to a specific age group and their most frequently occurring expenses though. That way one can limit the amount spent on health insurance coverage based on one’s own health profile.

Now that part I cloud envision as being a commercial part in the total of health insurance. But basic health care should be as accessible as possible, because in my own opinion it will contribute to a healthy population (and thus workforce). By taking out the commercial element in basic coverage, the personal interests of medical personnel can also be pre-empted: read somewhere that in the American system specialists for example are paid by the amount of treatments, making it attractive for them to prescribe unnecessary treatments. Flat rates will curb this.

Anyway, I am right now confused on what the debate is all about: is it the ‘death panels’ some idiots are talking about, or the (non)support of the AARP for the Bill?

[chuckc]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

IAnyway, I am right now confused on what the debate is all about: is it the ‘death panels’ some idiots are talking about, or the (non)support of the AARP for the Bill?

pretty simple...obama is trying to have government take over everything since he has been in office (bank bailout, 800billion stimulus, chryler/gm takeover, and now he wants to take over health care)

most americans are against big government and most americans DONT trust our gov. at all anymore.

we are not stupid and dont believe his lies that we are going to be able to provide 48million more people health care and it wont cost us anymore money and that we wont lose what we have now. how the f*ck are we going to have enough doctors for 48million more people??????

we scared to death thinking that our incompitent governemnt wants to take over health care.....when we currently have the best health care/doctors/medicine in the world.

and last, we are already going BANKRUPT with all this gov spending and cant afford anther massive gov take over

F*ck this big Gov't bull sh*t

[toasty]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

Anyway, I am right now confused on what the debate is all about: is it the ‘death panels’ some idiots are talking about, or the (non)support of the AARP for the Bill?

Right now we are talking about the fact that Fake President Barry Soetoro is a big fat liar, and therefore a terrorist, the end.

[runningman]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

Oh Poor Toasty.. Resorting to ridiculous talk. Toasty you forgot to add that we are all racist for not going with obama's plan.

Great read chuck thanks.

Well I guess that is that really. The American people aren't for this big gov't that is happening.

[Yao]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

Though I do understand you, you seem somewhat biased in your assertions here Chuck ;-). The funny thing is that somehow people seem to have a hard time believing that universal health care can be achieved at a minimum of extra expenditure, but this might in my opinion be the result of not enough transparency as to how state resources are allocated in the first place.

First of all, I'd say that part of the expenses can be covered by imposing a mandatory but reasonable fee on every individual that subscribes to such a national programme.

Second, it has already been made clear (but not clear enough I guess) that it is exactly the expenses that have to be made for uninsured people that put a heavy burden on the state's expenses: a burden that would be shifted to insurance companies if everyone is insured, because then the state wouldn't be the one paying for those medical treatments anymore.

There will be more ways like increasing some taxes, even though Americans in general are allergic to that word. However, (and third argument) universal coverage may indirectly also lower the costs for the state (and thus for citizens paying taxes). For example: "Half of all personal bankruptcies in the US are at least partially the result of medical expenses [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8160058.stm]. This is money that is lost for the economy, but wouldn't have to be if people wouldn't have to file for bankruptcy in the first place as a result of sky-high medical bills or deductibles. In the same line another result may very well be a decrease of people that have to rely on social welfare funds to stay afloat financially. This way, in the long run universal coverage may at least partially pay back the investment your govt has to make now, but this would have to be calculated I must admit.

Fourth: in addition to a decreased pressure on welfare, a generally healthy workforce might (or will almost certainly) lead to increased GNP and tax income for the state, part of which can be redirected to health care plans. This may not be linear of course, but it would strike me as odd if there is not at least a reasonable correlation between the two.

I know that especially republicans have a healty aversion against too much government, but this whole health care plan should be seen apart from measures that have been taken to curb the economic crisis, and therefore what this whole debate is lacking in my opinion is a healthy dose of pragmatism -rather it is troubled by dogma and ideologic rhetoric and as I've stated before: those two are in general not the best ingredients to come to an effective policy or solution ;-)

[Yao]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

Right now we are talking about the fact that Fake President Barry Soetoro is a big fat liar, and therefore a terrorist, the end.

lmfao...you had me laughing out loud there man...

In addition to my former post: it seems that most people will acknowledge that the (commercially driven) insurance companies are not acting in the interest of their clients, and sometimes denying funding of treatment based on ruler obviously designed to minimize he occasions in which they will have to pay up. Despite the discontent with this practise, people are not willing to give the government a chance to show that it can do better for the simple reason that they traditionally distrust it.

Looks like a catch-22 situation to me. Rather ridiculous.

[runningman]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

Catch 22 -- you got that right. That is why I was saying earlier that Obama HAS to do something to build the confidence of the American People. If this plan just gets pushed through then there will be a revolt. He must find somene to blame for the economy crashing. The excuse of "It just happened" isn't working well with the people.

Goldman Sachs is the heart of the problem. If he wanted to get the trust of the American people he should dismantle Goldman into smaller pieces as well as any other to big to fail companies. Moral hazard has already taken place. He could have wiped out the VISA debts of every American plus some rather than give it all to the banks. That way the public would be out buying more and putting more on its VISA's. I know it sounds ridiculous but imagine being a big banker right now. They gave out horrible loans and got rewarded for it.

[Lorn]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

lmfao...you had me laughing out loud there man...

Despite the discontent with this practise, people are not willing to give the government a chance to show that it can do better for the simple reason that they traditionally distrust it.

Another reason can be added to the distrust issue. Government traditionally runs things worse.

No easy answers here obviously, with so many people involved with infinitely varying philosophy's, ego's, loyalties and blood ties maybe this bumbling mess or some form of it is the only thing that functions a bit. I don't know.

I do think this country and its people have lost sight of what governments involvement should be but again that's my one amongst 300 million opinion.

[Miroslav]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

.....when we currently have the best health care/doctors/medicine in the world.

as I said before, I'm not for this version of the plan. But this statement to me seems quite debatable... Most data I see suggests that we have by far the most expensive health care system per capita in the world which leads to decidedly mediocre results in context of most first-world countries. Health care spending has been growing much faster than the overall economy, and most people forecast it to continue to skyrocket. And somewhere between 40-50 million Americans have no health care at all, save for the emergency room. So while the new proposal may not be the right one, but I think it is important to recognize that the current system is not sustainable and that something will have to be done that quite different from today.

[toasty]

Re: Town Halls Turn into Town Mess

as I said before, I'm not for this version of the plan. But this statement to me seems quite debatable... Most data I see suggests that we have by far the most expensive health care system per capita in the world which leads to decidedly mediocre results in context of most first-world countries. Health care spending has been growing much faster than the overall economy, and most people forecast it to continue to skyrocket. And somewhere between 40-50 million Americans have no health care at all, save for the emergency room. So while the new proposal may not be the right one, but I think it is important to recognize that the current system is not sustainable and that something will have to be done that quite different from today.

In a related point, people routinely tout the US health care system as the best in the world, which is not only not a foregone conclusion, some would say it's demonstrably false. It may well be the case that the best doctors in the world come to the US to practice, which would mean that we have access to the best medicine, but that's different from us having the best health care system. If you don't have health care coverage or a boatload of money, it doesn't really much matter how good the doctors are here.

As of the year 2000, the World Health Organization ranked the US as having the 37th best health care system in the world. If you're inclined to attack the methodology, feel free to take a look at the metrics they used here and offer something concrete. We do spend the most on health care per capita, though, so there's that.