What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Private Online Shopping Clubs Work view!
howlifeworks.com - How to become a member and get discounts of up to 80% on must-have luxury goods
715 Comments
- theghostofme, on 09/22/2009, -38/+589So, wait...why is there a controversy around this? This sounds like a great ***** idea. Hell, I typically lean more conservative when I vote, but sign me up for this!
And, though off topic, I have to admit that it's so refreshing to have a president who can give a stirring speech once again. For eight years, I would cringe and facepalm during many of Bush's speeches. Now, I can actually go, "Hey, all right. He got the point across...and didn't sound like a dumb ass once!" - Logicexe, on 09/22/2009, -50/+486Missed a couple of important points:
- Socialism
- Death Panels
- Nazis
- Communism
- Obama is black *nudge nudge*
Just trying to bring some balance. - meese, on 09/21/2009, -25/+372I've been looking for a short video to send to friends and family on health care reform...this fits the bill perfectly.
- ChristmasPoo, on 09/22/2009, -24/+180They need a picture book
- Tddupre, on 09/22/2009, -29/+160How can anyone deny that this is a good plan to follow
- DankBuddz, on 09/22/2009, -15/+141So unhealthy people pay the same rate as healthier people. Kind of like I don't have any kids but I still pay taxes that go toward public schools and everything else I don't use? That's a pretty pathetic reason to be opposed to reform.
- ChiaGod, on 09/22/2009, -16/+133It's easy to get more for less (or the same money) when you're currently getting ripped off like the US is atm.
Heck, the UK can cover 100% of it's population paying nearly half of GDP and less than half overall (per capita) than we do.
"Health spending per head
US $7,290
UK $2,992"
From the first google hit:
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/103416 - phpirate, on 09/22/2009, -3/+110There's only two disadvantages:
- Greedy insurance companies lose money.
- We Canadians will have less to brag about :( - govsucks, on 09/22/2009, -106/+206When Social Security was started in 1935 the government PROMISED it would NEVER take more than 6%. 3% for you and 3% for your employer "contribution". We now pay more than DOUBLE the lie that we were sold and that is going to change again very soon. In actuality we all pay 12+ percent to SS, you employer simply pays you 6% less to compensate for their "contribution"
Medicare is now 8-10 times more expensive than we were told it would be.
Is the war in Iraq less expensive or MUCH MUCH more expensive than we were promised?
If you believe government you are a ***** fool. - tchambers, on 09/21/2009, -25/+119agreed... really good stuff...
- trailmix10, on 10/29/2009, -34/+124That communist bastard wants to provide health care for people starting small businesses! Stop him!
- PattySoandSo, on 09/22/2009, -33/+121Excellent video. Information anyone -- even those being manipulated and exploited at rallies, etc. by the extreme right fatcats who'll stop at nothing to maintain the status quo -- can absorb and understand.
- VaderCatLover, on 09/22/2009, -33/+114Makes sense to me. rest of the country needs to get a ***** brain.
- jrm125, on 09/22/2009, -6/+83stockgotti's brain in a single word?
Pancakes
There. I just saved you from an idiot. - charlietuna, on 09/22/2009, -16/+87I have never heard of anyone on the far right offer constructive changes to this bill in an attempt to improve it. This is a kill bill campaign -- pure and simple.
(yeah, a pun is in there) - 47f0, on 09/22/2009, -9/+71Yeah, the U.K. medical system stinks so bad that they poll higher numbers of satisfaction than we do, and in the ultimate poll, the one answered only by one respondent, a Mr. Death, they rank a higher lifespan than we do.
And, please get your facts straight. The single biggest increase in the cost of health care has been health insurance, whose rates, deductibles and co-pays have risen far faster than any of the medical expenses they claim to cover. - DOCNM, on 09/22/2009, -3/+61YO HONDAMAN. I'M HAPPY FOR YOU. IMMA LET YOU FINISH BUT JOE WILSON HAD ONE OF THE BEST DISPLAY OF IGNORANCE OF ALL TIME!!!
- 47f0, on 09/22/2009, -36/+90Talk about ***** fools, govsucks... you may just take the cake.
In the United States, the lifespan in the 20th century has increased by 30 years, a good chunk of that in the last half-century. If our current lifespan was 62, as it was in 1935, we'd have no problems with an age 65 SoSec.
What's remarkable is that in spite of the vastly increased number of eligible individuals over the last few decades is that SoSec has remained as cheap as it has. - meese, on 09/22/2009, -8/+60I've tried the UK system as an American while visiting there several times (one time even at the British Virgin Islands, which I'm sure conservatives think is some backwards little island), and I can say first-hand that it is better than our system. And I have insurance here.
It's efficient, there's no hassle about what the insurance company will cover, and the doctors don't worry about whether they will be allowed or disallowed to make medical decisions by insurers (since they know that they can do what's best).
So mbraynard and others don't really know what they're talking about. - dafragsta, on 09/22/2009, -5/+53You lie!
- stockgotti, on 09/22/2009, -27/+72Common sense economics will get you buried into oblivion on this site. If it doesn't add to the deficit and he's not proposing abolishing any very expensive federal programs, that means that taxes will be drastically raised. That's common sense. Either raise taxes or increase the deficit. Now bury us to the deepest depths of Hell, you formerly anti-war Obamanoids.
- pstroll, on 09/22/2009, -56/+101"Not one penny added to the deficit"
Wow, looks like taxes are going to skyrocket in the US to pay for this. - orbital318, on 09/22/2009, -1/+45Its a speech not a doctoral thesis :P
- douce2, on 09/22/2009, -35/+76You know what we haven't had in a long time? A good revolution.
- NJSlacker, on 09/22/2009, -4/+45That'd be great! Maybe 10-15 pages, big pictures, pass them out at the tea parties...
- getjustin, on 09/22/2009, -2/+41Aw how cute, parroting back the oral diarrhea you heard on Fox.....
- bovox, on 09/22/2009, -34/+69He fails to mention that uninsured people who make more than $30,000/year will HAVE TO pay up to 13% of their income to insurance companies for insurance. If they do not, then they will have to pay a $4700 fine. This doesn't sit well with me. It isn't fair that the middle class has to pay such a huge burden so that some chain-smoking, fat, non-exercising, reality-TV-watching, unemployed lazy person can see a doctor for a self-inflicted condition that she is too lazy to do anything about.
The vast majority of health problems in America are due to overeating, obesity, inactive lifestyles, smoking. Why should the middle class be forced to pay for treating these conditions that people did to themselves? - ditroia, on 09/22/2009, -6/+41Makes Sense to me as well, but what do I know, I'm Australian.
Cheers
Dave - everyunitone, on 09/22/2009, -8/+42I would digg you up twice if I could.
- ricer333, on 09/22/2009, -18/+52hey govnsucks heres a little read for you!
I am a conservative.
This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the U.S. Department of Energy.
I then took a shower in the clean water provided by a municipal water utility.
After that, I turned on the TV to one of the FCC-regulated channels to see what the National Weather Service of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration determined the weather was going to be like, using satellites designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
I watched this while eating my breakfast of U.S. Department of Agriculture-inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined as safe by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
At the appropriate time, as regulated by the U.S. Congress and kept accurate by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the U.S. Naval Observatory, I get into my National Highway Traffic Safety Administration-approved automobile and set out to work on the roads build by the local, state, and federal Departments of Transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level
determined by the Environmental Protection Agency, using legal tender issued by the Federal Reserve Bank.
On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the U.S. Postal Service and drop the kids off at the public school.
After spending another day not being maimed or killed at work thanks to the workplace regulations imposed by the Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health administration, enjoying another two meals which again do not kill me because of the USDA, I drive my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to my house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building codes and Fire Marshal's inspection, and which has not been plundered of all its
valuables thanks to the local police department.
And then I log on to the internet -- which was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration -- and post on Freerepublic.com and Fox News forums about how SOCIALISM in medicine is BAD because the government can't do anything right. - stockgotti, on 09/22/2009, -12/+43I don't think you know what the term "strawman" even means because nothing I said came even remotely close to being a strawman agrument. I'm simply bringing up the fact that if you spend money without increasing debt, that means you have to pay for it up front. Since our treasury is already trillions in debt, the only way we can pay for it up front is to raise taxes. That's not a strawman argument. That's common ***** sense. I can't believe I even have to explain that.
- Tddupre, on 09/22/2009, -17/+48Well maybe there would be some legislation out if people weren't marching around calling everybody socialist and ***** like that.
- woofers07, on 09/22/2009, -2/+32Why can't all conservatives be like you?
- duke, on 09/22/2009, -2/+31Um, it already has 40K views, and it was posted YESTERDAY.
I guess I can understand your disappointment, though. If it were a Bush video counted by Diebold voting machines, it probably would have racked up over 100K views the day before it was posted. - SilverStandard, on 09/22/2009, -26/+54Too bad no one in Congress read the damn bill.
- iBleeedOrange, on 09/22/2009, -9/+35I can't believe I'm going to respond to that ridiculously long and inaccurate post, here we go.
"You could have done the same thing with a private water company or a well."
Water is limited for certain regions and a company would gain a monopoly and eventually charge ludicrous rates. I've worked for my cities water supply, they supply water for Onondaga county and surrounding counties in NY.
Well's?? Really? you can't just dig down and hit water, its not always there. Also most of that water is contaminated and needs to be cleaned.
"You mean the FCC that won't let people say "frak" or ***** on TV and wants something called the "fairness doctrine"?"
I may be 20 and would love to see ***** and people saying ***** (thats what I think you meant) but alas when I have children I don't wish for them to such things until I deem it time to talk to them about "The birds and the bees"
"WOW, who get everything from private companies."
Yes, yes they did complete government control is not what anyone wants here, even you can agree to that, but it is still regulated by the government because it would be MUCH easier for a private company to manipulate what is broad casted.
You mean the same USDA that inspected peanut plants in GA 4 times before they sickened hundreds and killed twelve?
I can relate to this again, I had salmonella back in '07 due to peanut butter. You expect a private company to be able to regulate everything and not ever be persuaded to or bribed to lower regulations and perhaps tamper with food? Also, how many times do you eat something that doesn't cause you to get sick? Do you have any idea what the process requires to regulate our food, and do you have any idea what is put into our food to make us healthier? (Of course the bad out weighs the good in "junk food")
Than could be done with a sun dial or by simply looking up in the sky. But maintain infrastructure and standards, again a actual function of the government that is constitutional. BTW, the same people who keep us off the Metric system, bravo.
A sun dial? what is this Rome circa 0 A.D.?? looking at the sky?? I don't know about you but what happens if its cloudy, I'm from Syracuse and we don't even get 80 sunny days in the year. I can't just look at the sky and know that its 1:42 pm. How would a private company make a profit from this? who would be paying the people it requires to keep out satellites in orbit, the first rule of a business is that it MUST make a profit in some way, if not then it will not succeed, and no one can volunteer time for this job, the knowledge and skills required, let alone time don't allow that.
"WOW, maintaining infrastructure, an actual constitutionally mandated function of the government."
Yes, for good reason, again where I am from it snows A LOT. The salt dumped on our roads that allow me to go to school, work, a friends house...etc etc slowly deteriorates them, and they need maintenance. Just because a group of men almost 300 years ago couldn't think of it doesn't mean our government shouldn't do it. How were they supposed to know that we would have devices that would allow us to travel at speeds from 1mph to 65 mph (regulated by the government again).
"Oh yeah, thats been a big help, you forgot to mention "paid your inflationary stealth tax at the cost of your families well being so that government can print and spend money it doesn't actually have""
While yes things have changed and the amount of money we are printing could be above the amount we have ( it most likely is) Who else do you expect to do this job? A private company?? The Federal Reserve Bank is worse enough thank you.
"The 7 Billion in debt post office and the schools that are turning out 18 year old kids that can't read and don't know who the vice president is?"
Do you have any idea how good our mail system is? the slightest? The fact that I can write a letter put in a box and tomorrow it COULD BE ANYWHERE is amazing. Yes our public schools are horrible, but private schools, if you haven't noticed are incredibly expensive and not everyone can afford them. Don't blame the schools for the lack of motivation from students and lack of support from families. Most kids don't give a ***** who the VP is. This isn't the governments fault, its the students and families themselves.
"Yes, because companies LOVE to spend money training people and then have them killed. What ***** stupid copy and paste *****."
I believe you mis-understood what point he was bringing to the table, back in the 20's I'm sure you heard of how a manager locked the door on a plant. The plant caught fire, hundreds of woman locked inside were killed. Mandatory breaks, limits on how many hours people can work, not allowing teenagers to work a full time job and go to school at the same time, etc, etc.
"Yeah, ecoli spinach anyone?"
Again refer to the points I made above :)
"Yeah, because without that companies would build houses that burn down and they would stay in business because people would continue to buy them right?"
Who ever said that we don't want companies to build houses. I do, I want a competitive price that I can compare against other companies to assure that I get the best possible deal. How ever I do want the re assurance that if a family member happened to leave a curling iron on that the PRIVATE company that I receive protection from would call the correct emergency services, eg police, fire department, 911. I'm also happy that the government regulations that make sure that my house is built with the proper materials that can with stand the forces of mother nature, ex: If I lived in San Fransisco I would want my house built to withstand the potential earth quake.
And uses lines built mostly by AT&T, a company the government has spent millions to tear apart and is now almost completely back together, without whom, the internet would have a hard time existing with or without DARPA. Bravo again
By the manner in which you posted I presume that you were not around when AT&T controlled most of the market. If you're in business and you have no competition what is the point in spending more money researching new potential ideas that could revolutionize the world? There is no point because you may not find them and you don't want to lose more money. Those lines haven't been updated by AT&T since then either. Notice how since the government doesn't mandate updates how the lines stay the same? the same ***** lines that are preventing us from getting the 10-20 mbs average that some other countries have? while we are lucky to have 1 mbs?
"How ***** stupid. Once again IGNORE governments HISTORICAL record of absolute failure to copy and paste some ***** that in no way refutes my statement that the cost will be far higher than we are being told."
I don't believe you had a rebuttal for his statement. Also I don't believe this person is "the government" as you make it sound. He wasn't refuting any of your statements because he wasn't trying to. Yes of course it's going to be higher than we are told, everything thing is. So be it, if I have to pay a bit more in taxes to allow people who haven't been as lucky or as smart as I am then I will.
It's too bad that no one will read either of our pointless long and unneeded posts. I wish you a good day sir or madam :) - ozydingo, on 09/22/2009, -6/+32Though I agree with your reasoning, that doesn't invalidate govsuck's central point. Yes, it was unexpected circumstances that raised the cost above what was planned. Ultimately, I read govsuck's point as saying--it could just as easily happen with this. Gratned, I could see it going either way; there are many arguments for why costs might end up being reduced as well as increased. But that's the point--it could go either way. Just be aware of that.
Clearly, calling him a fool was unjustified. Why cheapen your argument with this type of ad hominem? - meese, on 09/22/2009, -5/+30Actually, Pelosi has already held a session (many hours long) where she forced Democrats in the house to read the bill and to be fully briefed on it before they voted on the house version. Probably to preempt complaints like yours.
- repins, on 09/22/2009, -8/+31Obama does not have a plan, the only plans out there right now are senate and house bills. He might support them but they are not "his" plans
- Countess666, on 09/22/2009, -1/+24considering you spend twice the % of GDP on healthcare that other developed nations do without getting any additional benefits i'd say there is a lot of room for improvement and opportunities to save money.
- Rodalli, on 09/22/2009, -5/+27I don't get what part of "hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and fraud as well as unwarranted subsidies in medicare that go to insurance companies" it is that you don't understand.
I'm not saying the man isn't being overly optimistic about where he's going to get the money. But don't act like he's not telling you where the money's coming from, cause he is. It's right there in the middle of the damn video @ 2:15.
Most of the reform he's talking about is regulating the current health insurance system, not setting up "free health insurance for everyone". He tells you exactly how it's going to work. By stopping the health insurance companies from being sons of bitches, and setting up an insurance exchange whereby people can find competitively priced insurance, the majority of the problem will eliminate itself. Only the poorest 10% of Americans, who cannot afford any health insurance, would be covered by the government under this plan. All of that can easily be paid for by cutting back on waste and abuse in the current system. It's a simple reappropriation of funds.
I don't understand these new Joe Wilson politics of simply assuming someone is lying and dismissing their debate all together because of it. You only hear what you want to hear? How does that help anyone? That's not how our government is supposed to work. Congress is supposed to debate what is THERE, so let it happen. Stop pretending the man has no plan to pay for the program when he actually does.
Why do you have to be so full of *****? - theghostofme, on 09/22/2009, -2/+24Makes sense to me, but what do I know? I'm a bear! I suck the heads off of fish!
- ricer333, on 09/22/2009, -7/+29you're all right, I'm not conservative. if you both have been around Digg long enough you would have seen this posting from other sites. the point is, stop Dogging government when there are a lot of good things that it has done. Yes there are negative things as well, but the original comment from govsucks "if you believe government you are a fool" is WAY out of line.
Hate to tell you both this, but there is CORRUPTION everywhere. This isn't a perfect world, but this public option is a SOUND idea.
I would say this in closing. If you don't like it, nothing is keeping you here in the States. Why don't you go somewhere else? - Feraldr00d, on 09/22/2009, -3/+25His comment being sarcastic would be...bad to you?
- clippclop, on 09/22/2009, -1/+22I wonder whatever happened to "Love thy neighbor"?
Anyway, yes i currently pay for fatties to get medical attention simply for being too fat. Does it make me made? Hell yes it does, especially since knowing that an hour a day can fix 90% of obese peoples health issues. How can it work any other way though? The idea is to provide coverage for people who cannot normally get it, obese people included. If you say, Universal health care for all, except obese people, then you've destroyed the purpose.
As a Canadian, i dont necessarily agree with people getting the same coverage as me since i take care of myself. But i strongly disagree with allowing people to just die. - Rodalli, on 09/22/2009, -4/+25@govsucks
You're insane. Are you even reading the responses you receive, or just glancing over them? Obviously, 47f0 isn't claiming the government is responsible for the increase of the American lifespan (although InfiniteNothing made a good argument for that, too). What he's saying is that there are other public health and population issues that have caused the price of Social Security and Medicare to increase.
And he's right. You can't expect the price of SS and Medicare to stay low when the percentage of non-working elderly to working youth has increased so dramatically over the past few decades. The problem right now is that the baby boomers are all going on social security, causing a drag on the program that the thinner population of younger working Americans can't keep up with.
Once the baby boomers pass on (no offense baby boomers, but people die, it's going to happen), the system will readjust. - meese, on 09/22/2009, -7/+27Which is why you should support a public insurance option to force insurance companies to have to compete with an efficient and inexpensive plan. (After all, Medicare has 4% overhead vs. the 20-30% overhead of private insurance, and still Medicare has higher satisfaction according to non-partisan polling studies.)
- TrevorBelmont, on 09/22/2009, -1/+21Hmm, I was in favor of the bill but your excessive textual laughter has got me thinking...
- wild, on 09/22/2009, -0/+20[Community ratings means that people who consistently make healthy choices have to pay the same (and therefore, more) as those who consistently make unhealthy choices.]
You do understand that insurance companies make their money solely from the healthy people right? And they charge near the same. Hell, if you are more at risk they put you in the worse plans. Healthy people pay more NOW, in the current system. - Mike17102, on 09/22/2009, -13/+33It wont cost more because the government told me so!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 730 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is