[Sarge]

Originally Posted by Wino

I have no idea what 'Obamacare' will be like, but if it is any where near like Medicare and available to all, then I'm all for it. It will save everyone - individuals, corps, small business tons of money that can be spent elsewhere rather than end up in the coffers of an insurance company that cares not for anything but profit.

I currently pay $300 a month for Part B & D Medicare and a BCBS supplemental medical care program. This is $9,400/yr. LESS than I was paying 1.5 years ago to BCBS for less coverage before I qualified for Medicare. I'm also still paying SS & Medical taxes from my small business that are not included in the amounts previous. Only the gods know how much I would be paying BCBS now if I were still on my old plan, but I would guess another $5-6000 tacked on to the past $9400/yr.

In the past two months I have been to my GP doctor, a heart specialist, a pain specialist, a neurologist, have had CT scans, X-rays, sonograms. I have maybe waited 30 minutes max. for any procedures and maybe a day or two at most to see the specialist. I've not been refused any procedures my doctors recommended.

Last year I had one minor out patient procedure and one minor surgery with over night hospital stay, a colonoscopy, an MRI along with numerous X-rays, heart specialist, heart monitor and electro sonogram. I've yet to have any out of pocket expense beyond my monthly premiums of $300. It isn't free, just less expensive.

All this doom and gloom you guys speak of is pure speculation with no basis in fact. I'm all for anything for everyone that will reduce their cost of health care. If I'm saving $9400 or more a year, just think what a family could save with a similar plan, leaving them money to spend for other necessities. Think of the money a small business or a large corporation could save. My health care coverage is not as good as our congress gets, but it's better than nothing at all.

Point taken Wino, my only concern is will we still have options available.

My main concern is what the President stated about giving a terminally ill person pain killers instead of opting for surgery. In other words, will these terminally ill patients have a surgery versus the new health care telling them, "sorry but you do not qualify for surgery but here are some pain killers". Im not making this up. This isnt a political thing. I would feel the same if any politician made the statement.


Could you please explain to me what you think the President is saying when he made the following statement.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...g_surgery.html

Maybe I didnt catch it but I never understood if he answered this womans question about the pace maker.

[Wino]

Originally Posted by Sarge

Point taken Wino, my only concern is will we still have options available.

My main concern is what the President stated about giving a terminally ill person pain killers instead of opting for surgery. In other words, will these terminally ill patients have a surgery versus the new health care telling them, "sorry but you do not qualify for surgery but here are some pain killers". Im not making this up. This isnt a political thing. I would feel the same if any politician made the statement.


Could you please explain to me what you think the President is saying when he made the following statement.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...g_surgery.html

Maybe I didnt catch it but I never understood if he answered this womans question about the pace maker.

If the 'Obamacare' is like what I currently have, then I expect no change - I will see the doctors I want and go to the hospitals I prefer. I would have a problem with any program that changed that specter. I have never had an HMO plan - always a PPO type and I would be adverse to that not being an option.

As to the comment Obama made about choice of surgery or pain killers - that applies to me now. Back surgery or pain pills? I chose the latter just recently. If the pills can control the discomfort vs. the possible negative out come of surgery (no guarantees it would resolve problem and could make it worse). That is the choice I made now. It could change in the future.

If I lived to be 100 and was told I needed a pacemaker that would extend my life two more years, I'm not sure I would do it, and would be upset if my daughters tried to force it on me. Since I doubt I will be faced with this, I can only speculate - it would depend on my quality of life, realizing that in most cases no one ever wants to die. Keeping a love one alive that has no quality of life is selfish of the living in that I believe they are being kept alive for the living rather than for the one suffering - just prolonging the agony of death for both parties.

[Sarge]

Originally Posted by Wino

As to the comment Obama made about choice of surgery or pain killers - that applies to me now. Back surgery or pain pills? I chose the latter just recently. If the pills can control the discomfort vs. the possible negative out come of surgery (no guarantees it would resolve problem and could make it worse). That is the choice I made now. It could change in the future.

If I lived to be 100 and was told I needed a pacemaker that would extend my life two more years, I'm not sure I would do it, and would be upset if my daughters tried to force it on me. Since I doubt I will be faced with this, I can only speculate - it would depend on my quality of life, realizing that in most cases no one ever wants to die. Keeping a love one alive that has no quality of life is selfish of the living in that I believe they are being kept alive for the living rather than for the one suffering - just prolonging the agony of death for both parties.

Key word is choice. At least you had an option, You chose the latter just recently. My question is will the proposed new health care still allow that choice or will it make the decision for you?

[pyritechips]

Originally Posted by wacor

Jim, I had hoped this to be more about the specifics of Obamacare as it progresses. That I thought would make it a bit different from the other threads.

Understood but I hope you see my point about how different facets (yours as one example) do not warrant individual threads on a topic in general (American healthcare). Another good example would be Obama. There has been a multitude of threads about him over the last year or so, some worthy, many not. Like I said, I'm letting this one stand so no worries. Give'm Heck!

[poochee]

Originally Posted by Sarge

Could you please explain to me what you think the President is saying when he made the following statement.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...g_surgery.html

Maybe I didnt catch it but I never understood if he answered this womans question about the pace maker.

IMO he answered her question as "making" choices. In this case the lady made the choice of getting another opinion. In her case the surgery was a success. At a 100 years she must have been very hardy!

If a person has a terminal illness, say six months left to live, surgery may not be an option because recovery time will use up their time left or the surgery may not be successful. It is up to the person to make that choice. It's called quality of life. I do believe in second opinions.

[Sarge]

Originally Posted by poochee

IMO he answered her question as "making" choices. In this case the lady made the choice of getting another opinion. In her case the surgery was a success. At a 100 years she must have been very hardy!

The woman asked

"Is there any consideration that can be given for a certain spirit a certain joy of living----quality of life or is it just a medical cutoff at a certain age."

The President responded with...

"I dont think we can make judgements based on peoples spirit."

So please give me the quote where President Obama answered the lady's question because I sure didnt hear it. Youre talking about his "choices" statement...

"Look, the first thing for all of us to understand that is we actually have some -- some choices to make about how we want to deal with our own end-of-life care,"

He didnt say the eldery woman would have those choices available as to the surgery versus medication. He said we have some choices to make about how we want to deal with our own end-of-life care. He immediately went on to say, one of things we can all promote is a living will.

To me, thats saying, hey that person is going to die, we better get a will started if we dont have one. That is not very assuring when it comes to this new health care system.

Originally Posted by poochee

If a person has a terminal illness, say six months left to live, surgery may not be an option because recovery time will use up their time left or the surgery may not be successful. It is up to the person to make that choice. It's called quality of life. I do believe in second opinions.

I understand what everyone who supports the new health care system is saying and it will bring me great joy to see every American with affordable health care but not if it takes away from the options, we as individuals, have available. No one has answered my question.

Whether the surgery may or may not be the best available option, who is the deciding factor in which option to choose. Is it the person or is the government who decides?

According to the way President Obama is talking, it very well may be the government who decides what options the patient has. That in my book, are not options but a mandate.

As far as second opinions go. How is someone who has the new health care going to get a second opinion on a mandated law that says youre going to get pain killers versus the surgery?

[poochee]

Originally Posted by Sarge

The woman asked

The President responded with...

You will have to read to read the plan for the all the details you want. You won't get all that detailed info from a town hall meeting. I stand by my interpretation for myself. Check google there may be detailed info there.

[Wino]

Originally Posted by Sarge

Key word is choice. At least you had an option, You chose the latter just recently. My question is will the proposed new health care still allow that choice or will it make the decision for you?

I will stand against any program that removes the choices I now have control over - that would not be an improvement, even at a cost savings. If a program passes and it has provisions with which I disagree, I will fight for the change. But I'm not going to condemn a program based on 'chicken little' expectations that don't exist before the program does. My Ouija board is no better than anyone else. My main desire is to see the price low enough that all can afford it, knowing that some will have to be carried by the taxpayers, same as done now, except the cost savings over all are tremendous for the majority. It may just be a pipe dream, but I think it is doable and should be done.

[Sarge]

Originally Posted by Wino

I will stand against any program that removes the choices I now have control over - that would not be an improvement, even at a cost savings. If a program passes and it has provisions with which I disagree, I will fight for the change. But I'm not going to condemn a program based on 'chicken little' expectations that don't exist before the program does. My Ouija board is no better than anyone else. My main desire is to see the price low enough that all can afford it, knowing that some will have to be carried by the taxpayers, same as done now, except the cost savings over all are tremendous for the majority. It may just be a pipe dream, but I think it is doable and should be done.

Once again Wino, good points made and I agree. A new program that removes choices is not the program I am willing to support. Although I am all for getting additional taxes taken out of my pay for all to have health care, I am not for it if my choices are taken away.

As for the "chicken little" that doesnt exist, dont be to sure about it not being implemented. I am basing it on what the President said but most importantly...what he didnt say.

[pyritechips]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

It's going to be a real mess if Obama succeeds.

Logically that makes no sense. If he succeeds how can it be a mess? I think you mean it's going to be a mess if he fails.

Of course, implying that he is doomed to fail even before it begins just shows your prejudice. In other words no matter what Obama tries you have decided before the fact that it will be bad for the country. In conclusion one can say that you are not to debate but to nay-say. Go away! This is Civilized Debate, not Civilized Nay-saying!

PS: The first part of my post is a logic trap. If you can point out the fallacy in my statement I will let you stay in this thread!

[wacor]

Originally Posted by pyritechips

Logically that makes no sense. If he succeeds how can it be a mess? I think you mean it's going to be a mess if he fails.

Of course, implying that he is doomed to fail even before it begins just shows your prejudice. In other words no matter what Obama tries you have decided before the fact that it will be bad for the country. In conclusion one can say that you are not to debate but to nay-say. Go away! This is Civilized Debate, not Civilized Nay-saying!

PS: The first part of my post is a logic trap. If you can point out the fallacy in my statement I will let you stay in this thread!

Obama is not doomed to fail. If that was the case then the right would be laughing at his folly.

Failure means not getting the legislation enacted. I prefer he fails. Because his success will be our loss. IMO

[pyritechips]

Government healthcare would be great for America! Your screwed up country needs a good dose of socialism. Look at the mess capitalism has caused!

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by pyritechips

Government healthcare would be great for America! Your screwed up country needs a good dose of socialism. Look at the mess capitalism has caused!

Look at the prosperity capitalism has caused!

You just don't get it.

[wacor]

Originally Posted by pyritechips

Government healthcare would be great for America! Your screwed up country needs a good dose of socialism. Look at the mess capitalism has caused!

Nice to see somebody else call it socialism.

Coming from a Canadian Commie Pinko that has some street cred.

[pyritechips]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Look at the prosperity capitalism has caused!

You just don't get it.

Hahaha! You mean paper prosperity! People owning half a million dollar houses, with a SUV and Beemer in the driveway. Furniture not bought at WallyWorld. 60" widescreen entertainment centres. All bought with money they never had. Now all that wonderful credit it being called in and there's no money in the cookie jar to pay for it! Hah! "prosperity"! What a laugh. You measure prosperity in material wealth? I measure it in mental health. (yes, the rhyme was intentional). Look at statistics from around the world. Who are the healthiest? Who are best fed? Who are best educated? Who live the longest? Who has the best social programs? Etc. Not once have I seen your country at #1. If you live in the best, richest, freest country in the world, as I have heard it described, then how can that be?

Steely Dan sang :

You wouldn't know a diamond
If you held it in your hand
The things you think are precious
I can't understand

I think America was great, and can be again, but not until a new way of thinking becomes commonplace, and includes how to deal with healthcare. I'm not bashing America; I'm critiquing it constructively. If anybody posts just to complain and lay blame they are being a lot less constructive than I am. I offer you this, in all sincerity, as suggested reading: http://forums.techguy.org/civilized-...ilization.html