My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
We Can't Afford to Wait
- Thread starter Blake Bowden
- Start date
TexMass
Registered User
During my employment with Oldcastle, an international comapany, I came in contact and worked with many employees from Europe and Canada. They laugh at our health care system. They told me all the horror stores we hear about Canada is not true. I am happy with the bill that is being proposed right now but unhappy so much of it has been stripped. It has been shown by the CBO that it will do what is says it will do financially and that is to be budget nuetral. I don't agree with the taxing of cadillac plans. I did like the original idea of using the tax revenue from the expiration of the tax cuts for the rich, 3%. This was the Bush tax cut for the rich that they are now letting expire. It will now be applied to the deficit. Harvard study says an average of 128 people die every day due to lack of insurance or underinsured. My wife is diabetic and since I changed jobs she now has a pre-existing condition. I have had surgery on both my knees and now have arthritis which I have been told is a pre-existing condition. Things must change. The one thing that really pissed me off was the Medicare Pharm bill that Bush signed. It increasesd the payment for medicare drugs from 80% to 90% but you cannot buy generic drugs. My mothers medicine went up over 300% because of this bill. I hope they all burn in hell.
Traveling Man
Premium Member
All heated rhetoric aside, I too work for an international company (a BBC if you will, a British Based Company).The majority of our employees are ex-pats from the UK or one of the territories. It was quite interesting when I bought up y’alls topic during our dinner conversation last week. As opposed to here there was no heated rhetoric, deplorable propaganda, what’s-in-it-for-me that I can make someone else pay for, etc. Just straight examination of facts. I was really quite revealing… I had only one question to ask (this was for all the dual citizenship ex-pats; If you were to seek any kind of extended treatment for a serious aliment, would you use the NHS or the American health system with your present insurance? The proof was in the pudding…
Sure, it's also possible he has a mistress in the US and wanted his 12 week recovery to be spent with her. We can wildly speculate about anything. Fact is, he's a millionaire and gets to shop around the world for his specific ailment and specific
As far as waiting in line - the basis of that entire "problem" is the idea that everyone has access. The only way to keep the line short is to make sure other Americans don't have access to medical care. This is what people are arguing for - making sure all Americans don't have access. Because when they do, you'll have to wait behind the guy who would otherwise not have been covered for pre-existing conditions or lack of payment.
I have no doubt we will make sure people with more money have higher access. And a millionaire is a millionaire and can probably rent a part of the hospital for his stay and keep a staff.
Nullification and sending in troops? I guess I didn't think you were serious, or at least its a different topic. As I pointed out you could apply this to anything. States all over the country don't want No Child Left Behind (or at least the unfunded portions). Do you think troops should be sent in? REAL ID replaced a law based on policies recommended by the 911 commission and many states are objecting to the cost and trouble of implementing REAL ID. Should troops be sent in?
What about Medicare or Social Security, which is essentially a similar policy? Do you think we should drag old people to the hospital under gun point to make them get care and take a retirement check? Do you think we should jail employers who refuse to deduct the tax amounts that go into these programs?
You can apply this to any federal program or policy.
My own answer is the same as the threads about "when can we revolt" - I expect everyone to be grown up and follow our actual laws, not theoretical ones. We still have the Supreme Court, Congress and Executive Branch. When one of those breaks down (and I do see a break down coming) then there's a problem. Until then, we have checks and balances that our elected officials can act on (if we demand it of them, but we don't).
Otherwise, you can run through any federal, state or city law and take it down to the individual at any moment to decide to revolt - simply because you disagree.
I wouldn't mind having Texas Rangers investigate our phone hubs around the state and removing the federal branches allowing unfettered access to our communications. But the country's elected officials were supported when they granted amnesty and a continuation of the policy.
Nullification is a good rhetorical tool - we can use the word "tyranny" then. But it can be applied to a massive amount of items at any moment. And we really should have the ability at the local level, city and individual. After all, "they're going to invade and shove guns in our faces to make us take our social security check!!!"
To bring this conversation to a masonic level - we have the same decisions. Does every lodge stand by and vet the Grand Lodge decisions to make sure they are masonic in our estimation? And as individuals do we do the same? When we disagree, do we just cut off the Grand Lodge?
Texas is dead last in insurance coverage and rank 30 in longevity of our states.
Play around with this map and look at the rankings of the states you think would nullify national health care:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14788133/ns/health-aging/ (Longevity)
Let's fight to keep it that way!!!???
There is no single plan on the table. Anyone who talks as if there is is being dishonest. At the very least there are two different Congressional Bills. More than that, they still need to get both houses to agree. None of them were written by Obama. Universal Health Care has a wide variety of ways to be implemented. There is no single way, and with EVERY other industrialized nation having implemented it, you would think our great nation would be able to analyze the best and worst implementations and find a good method.
Instead, we rely on anecdotes and exaggerations with the final goal of making sure every American isn't insured, or not even most (after all - we'd have to wait, a policy which could be changed with an altered focus on increased medical training). With Texas dead last in insuring our children (which means slower starts to good health and more expenditures later in life for our state and fellow Texans) and our state and America trailing others in longevity, well being and health - our biggest focus seems to be on declaring ourselves supreme because the wealthy have the best in the world.
So, in addition to acting like grown up and being peaceable citizens so long as our government is in tact, I'd say that if a state which is dead last in being able to see a doctor and trailing others in health as a state and in nation with similar trends opts to not participate - that should be an option. Just make sure they pay twice as much when they come in because they chose to actively maintain the poor health of their citizens while not offering alternatives or suggestions among the wide variety of plans active throughout the world. Or better yet, never allow them to join and see where their wealthy citizens fly to get medical care.
But again, if the goal is to never have to wait with your fellow man because they also have health coverage, and to be sure millionaire foreigners have better medical care than most Texans - then this discussion is moot.
If my employment ever lapses for too long, both me and my wife are screwed for any future care on a few issues. Unfortunately, the most common rhetorical point is "wait time" which means we need to keep the number of people accessing health care reduced (and not invest in additional medical training).
Healthcare reform is being treated as one monolithic plan hand written by Obama, when it's a high number of issues implemented a very wide variety of ways throughout the world. And there is a dominating feeling of apathy or antipathy for our fellows "leeching off of us" instead of empathy.
My wife has a genetic disease in her family which she didn't inherit, luckily. But she was tested while in a "socialist" european country and while awaiting the results, considered that she might actually have to stay in that country so she could live her life with care without bankrupting her family (keep in mind people pay taxes towards care before they get sick).
Traveling Man
Premium Member
Like I said, “The Ruling Class Elite”.
That had to be the most perverse logic that I have ever read in my life…
The fact of the matter is everyone wished all are covered and paid their own way, but that would boggle your mind wouldn’t it? The real elite (the ruling class) will not personally reject their plans and buy unto the public option, why? Could it be they are just using “breads and circuses to entertain the masses? Could this once again be the utilisation of class warfare envy?
So it’s this 75% of America that doesn’t want this, that are whom you are referring? For someone that claims to know all the facts, this (all of the programs before congress) doesn’t put a dent in the number of uninsured. Have you ever heard of cost rolling, ever wonder why your hospital district takes are so high? Tell me this again.
They just didn’t want any accountability period. The rest is just a smoke screen. No benchmark, no rating, no accountability. It’s that simple.
You missed the mark on that one, as they do. Besides did you ever figure why that (mandated employer payroll deduction) piece of legislation was passed in the dead of night? Hint: so that there would never be a taxpayer revolt! Read: plebs…
Great job on the fear factor there… The real facts are they’ll just take more taxes out; lest we forget “they” (the federal government) took the money out of our checks, taxed it, then sent it back out; the checks based on the value of the more increasingly useless value of the money “they” print as fast as they can print it. A nice gig if you can get it.
What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? It does not!
One MORE TIME we are NOT like EVERY other industrialized nation… If you want it, go there, there was a reason the Europeans chose to came HERE, get it?
What part of more illegal aliens, equals more uninsured do you not understand?
And then you expect us to feel guilty? NOT!
Traveling Man
Premium Member
Ah I see, the line is getting too long for those that think they should have equal access without paying. I now get it!
Again I say, You really didn't think you were going to make your neighbour pay for this without your contribution "for the greater good" did you? How selfish of you (and shame on you if you were).
Which are the only ones with consistent access to health care in this country. Even if they're from another country. We are wholly agreed.
It is perverse logic - but "waiting" is the most cried out argument. Everyone does pay their own way under the public option (which is only one of many ways to implement universal healthcare). This would be the "tax" and "penalty' people complain about. But again - that is one of many options. Not the only one and not required. The widespread complain isn't " I have to wait and someone else didn't pay as much as I did" it is simply " I have to wait"
Want what? There are multiple options and issues at hand. Is "this" the Senate plan or the Congressional plan? Or another plan?
I apologize for citing sources and studies??
I don't claim to know everything - I do claim to know:
Many countries have implemented universal healthcare in a wide variety of ways and methods
There is no single method that is the sole method on the table right now
The United States isn't even in the top 25 of health in the world and while we might have the best doctors - foreigners have better access to them than a large number of our own citizens.
Pssst.. Someone else brought up forcing federal programs earlier in the thread and I was responding.
Besides this being a forum consisting of masons, in theory, That was in response to nullifying federal programs at a local level.
Kinda related.
No we're not - we're less healthy and we like it that way. Other industrialized nations have a culture more slanted towards life.
LOL. Booga boogga boo. They make your water taste funny too.
Absolutely not - I don't expect any guilt when there is a general apathy and antipathy for well being and health.
Sorry to cite facts again, but:
"In 2007, Texas ranked 50th in the nation, with only 46.7 percent of Texans having employment-based health insurance coverage. FamilesUSA reports eighty percent of the uninsured have at least one family member who works either full-time or part-time in 2007 to 2008.
http://www.texmed.org/Template.aspx?id=5517"
Employed full time on the books, just not insured. Obviously illegal.
If its any consolation Hispanics use less medical care than others. Not actually a good thing though.
Two arguments.
1) I don't want to wait in line
2) I want others to pay their own way
Besides "paying their own way" being a separate issue from wait times (if everyone were capable of paying their own way, you would still have to wait), you're the first person I've ever heard to combine the two issues into one.
And again, one of the complaints about "one of the many options on the table" is the "penalty or tax" ------ which would be paying their own way.
If certain various people started going to the doctor more, you'd have to wait longer.
If coverage in Texas goes up 30%, you will have to wait longer for medical care in Texas. That's if people pay their own way or don't.
Also - if you take away "pre-existing condition" exclusions - you will have to wait longer for medical care.
Traveling Man
Premium Member
I look at your sources and I see who they are; once again, I follow the money.
I guess you, like the politicos don't understand, the "we the people” part of that pesky document the constitution. We have a say in our destiny, we are not regulated by the divine rights of kings vision.
75% of the population is happy with their health care and do not want these changes.
There is no need to have health care reform that is longer than the declaration of independence and the constitution combined that is being manipulated by lobbyists behind closed doors (the same ones being railed against here by the way).
The legislation needs only to be about five sentences long. (along with repealing all of those government programs that have increased the cost of our health care).
I can see the investment in medical tourism will become a bigger boom than it is now.
Sure I believe that; every time I see the statistics from our hospital district report and every time I take an employee into the emergency room for “emergency” care. Anyway thanks for the laugh.
You know what Samuel Clemens said about those statistics…
I guess you, like the politicos don't understand, the "we the people” part of that pesky document the constitution. We have a say in our destiny, we are not regulated by the divine rights of kings vision.
75% of the population is happy with their health care and do not want these changes.
There is no need to have health care reform that is longer than the declaration of independence and the constitution combined that is being manipulated by lobbyists behind closed doors (the same ones being railed against here by the way).
The legislation needs only to be about five sentences long. (along with repealing all of those government programs that have increased the cost of our health care).
I can see the investment in medical tourism will become a bigger boom than it is now.
Sure I believe that; every time I see the statistics from our hospital district report and every time I take an employee into the emergency room for “emergency” care. Anyway thanks for the laugh.
You know what Samuel Clemens said about those statistics…
Which changes?
This simple statistic on its own implies it is a survey of those insured. And, those who haven't lost coverage because of an illness or lapse in employment or coverage.
I'm happy with my health insurance. Not with the fact that if I'm laid off for too long before finding another job, several members of my young family won't ever be insurable again.
Yeah - I'd bet people who are insured are satisfied. I'd say that was a given. it's when they get sick in between jobs or even get a major illness that this changes.
It's easier to win an argument when you ignore the ones you don't like- or dismiss it before you see it based on anecdotes?
Traveling Man
Premium Member
Except they are not separate arguments; witness California’s increase in “private” hospitals.
It eliminates cost rolling and waits along with pay-for-services. What a concept!
Better yet, “medical tourism”, like the Canadian President, read; less expensive not because he’s a millionaire, except it wont be for anchor babies. Don’t think our doctors jobs are safe from being “offshored“.
That penalty is a joke because if you’re under the “means test” you pay nothing!
A joke at best, once again stealing from you neighbours.
Traveling Man
Premium Member
The facts are what I see in the emergency rooms and in my hospital district statements; those are the FACTS, not anecdotes or stats some shill for the AMA or any other self serving group wants to quote for some self serving purpose. Let's see if others see the very same facts. I guess I can not believe my lying eyes.
Last edited:
Well, like i said, no use in pushing it on people with antipathy towards humans. We we look at someone in need and simply see theft, then that about settles it.
I stole from my neighbors in my youth via free lunch at schools and subsidized housing and other means. I, my parents and siblings, pay plenty and am capable of paying plenty back because of our criminal leeching off of society. I paid back my crimes and gladly pay forward to the other filthy criminals who make less than I do.
I stole from my neighbors in my youth via free lunch at schools and subsidized housing and other means. I, my parents and siblings, pay plenty and am capable of paying plenty back because of our criminal leeching off of society. I paid back my crimes and gladly pay forward to the other filthy criminals who make less than I do.
Traveling Man
Premium Member
When charity becomes an entitlement it no longer is charity. We as citizens are granted certain privileges and rights, along with those rights come responsibilities. One of these responsibilities is to not become a burden upon society. Only the spoiled brat would claim charity as a right. This same distortion is held by the United Nations which think as individuals we are entitled to all kinds of things that an Utopian Society can provide, but the reality is there is no such guarantee or place. Wishing it so wont make it so. The fables of Robin Hood are just that, but in reality Robin Hood was a thief.
You can claim what “you think” about individuals with antipathy towards humans but you’d be wrong. There were days when we would by the widow a cow so she could have milk for her children and she would make cheese and other products that would afford her a living. We now give everybody free milk, receive nothing but further dependence and the demand for more entitlements.
You can claim what “you think” about individuals with antipathy towards humans but you’d be wrong. There were days when we would by the widow a cow so she could have milk for her children and she would make cheese and other products that would afford her a living. We now give everybody free milk, receive nothing but further dependence and the demand for more entitlements.
Not sure it is for those giving it either way when the recipient has to pass a judgement test.
Well, that's a simply wrong.
My two brothers who received free milk are veterans. Although they didn't received welfare while in the service, many others do: http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/moneymatters/a/foodstamps.htm
Spoiled brats?
My suspicion of antipathy comes from all of the demonizing language of the poor, sick and infants. But more so from the fact that their motives are already determined and insisted upon. They are criminals - lazy thieves clamoring for more.
The claim that the poor are clamoring for entitlement is wide spread and consistent. Especially the idea that they don't want to work or make enough money to pay their own way. If they're lazy and don't want to pay their own way, then of course they're despicable... something involving crime.. Thieves. This way they are immoral and criminals....
Of course, I've never seen this rally, heard the results of this conference of the poor and sick, or seen the survey of poor that says they don't want to work and demand others work for them. I've always seen people with jobs who wanted their kids fed. And families who wanted their family member to be healthy first, and to at least live if the possibility exist. But if they're vermin, of course we shouldn't help them.
A woman wakes up to find her husband as walked out. She might be someone who just wants to make sure her kids can eat, focus on school, are safe after school and are healthy - all of which require assistance or for which assistance is available.
But if she actually asks for it - well, then lets call her a thief who shouldn't have had kids she couldn't support. And if this is her second marriage and her first child was by her first husband, well then we can add whore. Obviously, we shouldn't help her.
However, if I in my graciousness dain to help her individually above her protests, then she just might be worthy of charity without being a lazy thieving drug addicted prostitute.
What if instead of focusing on the most fringe and demonizing extreme we can imagine, we thought about the working poor.
Of course, at this point we can start to talk about "how they shouldn't be allowed to have kids if they can't care for them" (even though many of the working poor don't have kids) or "they should have worked harder in school so they could get a better job."
We can assume their work ethic, motives and other demonizing factors at any point and then apply it to them all.
Then again, mention raising the minimum wage at all and people freak out. Mention making it a living wage, they'll be congressional riots. Mention forcing minimum wage to track inflation and we'll have a civil war on our hands. There is an insistence we have a large working poor class, and when we demonize them and assume their motives then well, the thieving bastards just have it coming to them.
Those who are willing to pay into social programs are thinking about the working poor. Opposition seems to be thinking about the thieving anchor baby crackheads who are just lazy at their core (and they kick puppies) while they drool over the riches earned by people with actual work ethics and morals. And if every poor and sick person is like that, well then obviously they deserve what they get.
42 million lazy thieves in working families. . I'm starting to hate the lazy bastards now :32:
Of course, I'd still like to know how we managed to determine so much of their motives and character.
Traveling Man
Premium Member
Oh please continue as this sounds familiar… VBG
You are preaching to the choir:
And you were doing so good until you went there. You again are wrong! You see your scenario was my life’s story, except you’ve got a couple of things wrong. First my mother didn’t ask, expect nor receive a hand out, whether it was food stamps, welfare, ADC or any thing of the kind. Step two, she got a job and raised us the best she could. My three brothers were not thieves or social miscreants of any kind. We were raised to believe that it would be more honourable to starve to death than to take something that didn’t belong to us. I started working at the age of 13 and haven’t stopped yet. Did I tell everyone else (my employer) how much I should be paid? No. Does the world owe me anything? Absolutely not. Am I demonized because of my wealth? Are those who think that I have more than my “fair share”? Do a lot of individuals think that somehow my wealth is purloined at the expense of others?
Keep on keeping’ on brother…
Last edited: