One foot in the grave for ObamaCare in 11th Circuit

Are you really that dense PS? I was not talking about Medicare,which along with SS, has done a lot to improve the lives of seniors. Single payer healthcare could do the same for the younger citizens without regard to their economic circumstances

jmc wrote: Sorry PS , for a very smart guy, you have a rational blind spot on this issue. This not philosophical it effects millions of real people. It can be fixed with a rational combination of common sense. Not a time for fairy tail thinking about what may have been. Real issue ,we need real solutions, not theoretical nonsense and pontificating blowhardiness.
Warned you I would take this to the gutter.

It can't be fixed by handing the federal government even more power to which it is not entitled jmc. The problem we have is rooted in their doing exactly that. The problem can't be fixed by adding more weight to the structure built on a faulty foundation. That will only hasten the demise of the structure. That is not philosophical, it is rational and reasoned. It is the precise reason that the people who wrote the Constitution resorted to an entirely new structure to fix the problems with the original confederation. Some things are so inherently flawed, regardless of intention, that there is simply no fixing them without dismantling what exists and starting from scratch. That is precisely where we are with Social Security and Medicare. Their original foundation was so faulty that no sound structure could be built on top of it. That's reality jmc, not philosophy.

PrintSmith wrote:

jmc wrote: Sorry PS , for a very smart guy, you have a rational blind spot on this issue. This not philosophical it effects millions of real people. It can be fixed with a rational combination of common sense. Not a time for fairy tail thinking about what may have been. Real issue ,we need real solutions, not theoretical nonsense and pontificating blowhardiness.
Warned you I would take this to the gutter.

It can't be fixed by handing the federal government even more power to which it is not entitled jmc. The problem we have is rooted in their doing exactly that. The problem can't be fixed by adding more weight to the structure built on a faulty foundation. That will only hasten the demise of the structure. That is not philosophical, it is rational and reasoned. It is the precise reason that the people who wrote the Constitution resorted to an entirely new structure to fix the problems with the original confederation. Some things are so inherently flawed, regardless of intention, that there is simply no fixing them without dismantling what exists and starting from scratch. That is precisely where we are with Social Security and Medicare. Their original foundation was so faulty that no sound structure could be built on top of it. That's reality jmc, not philosophy.

Sorry PS, theoretical nonsense, give me a solution other than let them die in the street. Pontificate about it all you want but most people living in 2011 want some real life solutions, you don't seem to have one to offer. i did or at least tried.And it would not cost you a cent.

archer wrote: Are you really that dense PS? I was not talking about Medicare,which along with SS, has done a lot to improve the lives of seniors. Single payer healthcare could do the same for the younger citizens without regard to their economic circumstances

And along with that help has come a lot of damage to the general welfare of the nation. $14 Trillion in accumulated debt and a $100 Trillion plus future unfunded liability that future taxpayers must somehow finance. Doing the same for the younger citizens will only increase the problem that exists that they have been saddled with by the people either on SS and Medicare or about to join the ranks of those enrolled in the programs. It would be a curse, not a cure.

gawd are you ever full of crap PS. Our freaking bridges are collapsing and our roads are crumbling because of our pursuit of empire and not any of your bs distractions. Buts we just gots to secure our big corporate oil (and others as well) interests, don't we? We've got to subsidize the big money players every time, with both the lives of our citizens and our treasury.

PS you go on and on and on and on, oh! about what our government can-or should and must-do. Hysteria from you about "stolen" and "bankrupt" is just so much hooey. We (how many freaking times does this need to be said??) ARE the government. We can decide that we want our government to be the single-payer for most health care in this country. Done. There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution that would EVER prohibit that. So get over it.

We need to get a firm grasp of our health care system away from the corporate for-profit model. We need some serious rethinking and not some overwrought Randroid doodoo. We need to reign in costs big time, for Medicare as well. BIG TIME. We all want the best money can buy as long as we don't really have to pay for it. We spend more of our health care dollars in the last year or two of life but yet very few want to take a hard look at the choices we make at that time. I don't want to see my neighbors, my fellow citizens, go bankrupt because one of them got seriously ill or injured because their insurance-if they have it- may only last a while. We all end up paying for it anyway, don't you know that? There are so many ways we can do this, fund this more fully and equitably. I would start with taxing (OH NO!!!) almost every transaction/trade on Wall Street. NO transaction fee for very small numbers of moves but as the number of transactions goes up the fee goes up and I'm talking about a small fee per trade. Computers have enabled the BigBoys to do millions of trades in seconds. Very nice how they can manipulate the market, no? Let's make them pay for that. Every time.

We need incentives to providers for giving their patients better outcomes, not merely ordering every test/procedure regardless the merit and the cost. For all of our fabulous health care we still rate way down the list on quality and outcomes. Why is that? How can we make ours the best and not just for those that have the money to pay for it? Surely with our wealth and knowledge we can do much much better. Insurance will still have a place for those that desire to have expanded coverage but it will no longer be the only place to get access to good health care. Why is this so out-of-the-question to you so-called Conservatives (what are you all trying to conserve anyway)? And what is it you are so afraid of? Success?

jmc wrote: Sorry PS, theoretical nonsense, give me a solution other than let them die in the street. Pontificate about it all you want but most people living in 2011 want some real life solutions, you don't seem to have one to offer. i did or at least tried.And it would not cost you a cent.

I have offered more than one jmc, but your fixed position on empowering the federal government further either prevents them from being heard or causes them to be rejected outright.

Take the program away from the federal government which has no business being involved in the domestic affairs of the citizens of the states in this manner. The states should be the ones implementing and overseeing such a program if such a program is to exist at all. As I have stated numerous times in the past, I have no issue with a state deciding to exercise its sovereign authority over the welfare of its citizens in this manner. Each state which decides to have such a program will tailor the program to suit their citizens and the citizens of the state will have a much greater degree of control over the program than they do with the one established by the federal government via the sophistry they have employed upon the text of the Constitution to usurp all power of governance to itself.

We've tried it at the one government level and it has failed - miserably - to provide the sustainable promise that was made when the power grab was effected. What say we try it the way the people who were more interested in personal freedom and liberty than the accumulation of power came up with for a change? What say you to giving the 50 states 50 chances to come up with a working program instead of only one entity trying one thing at a time when they decide to try anything at all instead of kicking the can further down the road so they can retain their seat of power within the general government? How about we let the states, which actually have the sovereign power, instead of the general government, which had to usurp it from the states, decide if they will have any such program for their citizens to begin with and if so, how that program can best both provide the needed and desired services without concurrently bankrupting the general welfare of the rest of the states along with their own?

poubelle wrote: gawd are you ever full of crap PS. Our freaking bridges are collapsing and our roads are crumbling because of our pursuit of empire and not any of your bs distractions. Buts we just gots to secure our big corporate oil (and others as well) interests, don't we? We've got to subsidize the big money players every time, with both the lives of our citizens and our treasury.

What a load of bovine scat poubelle. It is precisely because we have allowed the general government to usurp the power of governance both foreign and domestic that they have embarked upon that pursuit of empire just as every other sole government has done in the history of governance. Don't you get that by now? Isn't it as plain as the nose on Jimmy Durante's face to you yet? What happens when the people can no longer satiate the hunger of the government? The government goes out looking for new food sources to satisfy its appetite for power. That is why governments pursue empire building poubelle. The more power you invest in one government the more empire building it will engage in. That is the judgment of history poubelle, it has been proven true over and over and over again.

poubelle wrote: PS you go on and on and on and on, oh! about what our government can-or should and must-do. Hysteria from you about "stolen" and "bankrupt" is just so much hooey. We (how many freaking times does this need to be said??) ARE the government. We can decide that we want our government to be the single-payer for most health care in this country. Done. There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution that would EVER prohibit that. So get over it.

Ahhh, the tyranny of the majority of the pure democracy system of government again rears its ugly head under the pretense of doing good for all the people. That's been proven false as well by history poubelle. Trade your independence for security - the sweet siren song of despots and tyrants.

poubelle wrote: We need to get a firm grasp of our health care system away from the corporate for-profit model. We need some serious rethinking and not some overwrought Randroid doodoo. We need to reign in costs big time, for Medicare as well. BIG TIME. We all want the best money can buy as long as we don't really have to pay for it. We spend more of our health care dollars in the last year or two of life but yet very few want to take a hard look at the choices we make at that time. I don't want to see my neighbors, my fellow citizens, go bankrupt because one of them got seriously ill or injured because their insurance-if they have it- may only last a while. We all end up paying for it anyway, don't you know that? There are so many ways we can do this, fund this more fully and equitably. I would start with taxing (OH NO!!!) almost every transaction/trade on Wall Street. NO transaction fee for very small numbers of moves but as the number of transactions goes up the fee goes up and I'm talking about a small fee per trade. Computers have enabled the BigBoys to do millions of trades in seconds. Very nice how they can manipulate the market, no? Let's make them pay for that. Every time.

Hurrah - you've found the magic way to tax the middle class in a hidden manner by pretending that the big evil rich folks are the ones trading millions of shares. Guess what poubelle - that small fee you are talking about is a tax on all the people who have invested their savings for retirement into their mutual fund based 401K. Those big boys who trade millions of shares in a second using computers will simply look at that tax as another cost of doing business and pass that cost, plus a profit, along to the people who consume their services - the shareholders of the companies - who are your fellow citizens hoping that they can find a way to save enough money that they won't be dependent upon the failed SS program for their sustenance in their later years. Savings, by the way, that the general government simply inflates away through the devaluation of the currency as they seek to find a way to pay for the programs to begin with since the taxation that would be necessary would simply result in the crushing of the economy and result in the vast majority being equally poor and subjugated to the despotism of the ruling class with no hope of escape. Tell me poubelle, do you think that corruption is on the rise in the federal government as they usurp growing amounts of authority and power or has corruption within the federal government declined in the last century. We both know the answer to that, don't we? That as more power has been accumulated there has been more corruption that comes along with it? That is precisely the situation that was hoped could be avoided by strictly limiting the power and authority of the general government. Remove the constrictions of power and you remove the constrictions of corruption along with it. That is also the judgment of history poubelle.

poubelle wrote: We need incentives to providers for giving their patients better outcomes, not merely ordering every test/procedure regardless the merit and the cost. For all of our fabulous health care we still rate way down the list on quality and outcomes. Why is that? How can we make ours the best and not just for those that have the money to pay for it? Surely with our wealth and knowledge we can do much much better. Insurance will still have a place for those that desire to have expanded coverage but it will no longer be the only place to get access to good health care. Why is this so out-of-the-question to you so-called Conservatives (what are you all trying to conserve anyway)? And what is it you are so afraid of? Success?

I agree that we can make it better poubelle, and less expensive, but monopolies are generally the wrong way to achieve the desired end. It doesn't matter whether the monopoly is corporate or government, a monopoly is harmful more than it is beneficial. What drives production and quality up and costs down is competition, not homogenization and monopolization. What are you regressives so afraid of? That success can be achieved without central government control?

There you go again. And again. Enough of your tired tripe. I can't ever get through the first couple of sentences. We don't have a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Duh. We have a government wedded to the corporate masters. It's all about money, all the time. It almost looks like the great experiment has failed, finally. So, what do we do PS? Let the great hand of the free market fist us (paraphrased from a funny article) even more? Is that your awesome solution to everything? Pathetic. It will never be a positive, fair solution to anything. A joke. Magical thinking (sic) at it's best (worst?).

We need to start making people behave. Punishment. Lots and lots of punishment in the way of, get ready here it comes, TAXES on the wealthy. And then even more taxes. You don't like a transaction tax because, boo freaking hoo, they'll pass it on. Good, then we'll super tax their profits. Better laws and regulations are also needed and must be enforced. People seem to be finally waking up to the Wall Street banksters. Maybe this country and the world shouldn't be living and dying by what the criminals on Wall Street dictate. Growth for growth's sake is the signature of a cancer (another paraphrase). We need to get big money out of politics but the SCOTUS seems to believe differently. Is that also OK with you? Money is the great decider? You don't have money, no seat at the table for you, eh?

So, central government is the problem, the great boogeyman, the great satan. Poor Ronnie infected a nation's psyche with his brand of corporate whoredom and 30 years later we find ourselves here. No the problem is bad government or government done badly. And it crosses party lines. Duh.


(and I fibbed, I did read your post and there is a lot in it worth reading)
(so there!)

poubelle wrote: gawd are you ever full of crap PS. Our freaking bridges are collapsing and our roads are crumbling because of our pursuit of empire and not any of your bs distractions. Buts we just gots to secure our big corporate oil (and others as well) interests, don't we? We've got to subsidize the big money players every time, with both the lives of our citizens and our treasury.

PS you go on and on and on and on, oh! about what our government can-or should and must-do. Hysteria from you about "stolen" and "bankrupt" is just so much hooey. We (how many freaking times does this need to be said??) ARE the government. We can decide that we want our government to be the single-payer for most health care in this country. Done. There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution that would EVER prohibit that. So get over it.

We need to get a firm grasp of our health care system away from the corporate for-profit model. We need some serious rethinking and not some overwrought Randroid doodoo. We need to reign in costs big time, for Medicare as well. BIG TIME. We all want the best money can buy as long as we don't really have to pay for it. We spend more of our health care dollars in the last year or two of life but yet very few want to take a hard look at the choices we make at that time. I don't want to see my neighbors, my fellow citizens, go bankrupt because one of them got seriously ill or injured because their insurance-if they have it- may only last a while. We all end up paying for it anyway, don't you know that? There are so many ways we can do this, fund this more fully and equitably. I would start with taxing (OH NO!!!) almost every transaction/trade on Wall Street. NO transaction fee for very small numbers of moves but as the number of transactions goes up the fee goes up and I'm talking about a small fee per trade. Computers have enabled the BigBoys to do millions of trades in seconds. Very nice how they can manipulate the market, no? Let's make them pay for that. Every time.

We need incentives to providers for giving their patients better outcomes, not merely ordering every test/procedure regardless the merit and the cost. For all of our fabulous health care we still rate way down the list on quality and outcomes. Why is that? How can we make ours the best and not just for those that have the money to pay for it? Surely with our wealth and knowledge we can do much much better. Insurance will still have a place for those that desire to have expanded coverage but it will no longer be the only place to get access to good health care. Why is this so out-of-the-question to you so-called Conservatives (what are you all trying to conserve anyway)? And what is it you are so afraid of? Success?

Great Posting Poo! I literally couldn't have said it better myself.

poubelle wrote: There you go again. And again. Enough of your tired tripe. I can't ever get through the first couple of sentences.

Me either!...All the time here..I start reading thier regurgitated responses for the 2000th time and I just think to myself "oh forget it" and stop reading. I mean I just don't have time for nonsense anymore.