Well... they did it

[GoldenRivet]

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/11/07/house-passes-historic-health-care-bill-long-road-ahead-for-ref/?icid=main|main|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.politic sdaily.com%2F2009%2F11%2F07%2Fhouse-passes-historic-health-care-bill-long-road-ahead-for-ref%2F (http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/11/07/house-passes-historic-health-care-bill-long-road-ahead-for-ref/?icid=main%7Cmain%7Cdl1%7Clink3%7Chttp%3A%2F%2Fwww .politicsdaily.com%2F2009%2F11%2F07%2Fhouse-passes-historic-health-care-bill-long-road-ahead-for-ref%2F)

I only hope that this EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE BILL is as successful as the messiah says it will be. i really do...

but i'm not optimistic... and i foresee ghetto like conditions throughout hospitals and clinics in the coming years.

the field of medicine will no longer be a profitable and desirable industry for people to enter as hospital costs rise and profits fall... so shall salaries.

I dont know how you get $1.3 TRILLION from taxing only those individuals that earn over 500K per year... if you ask me... we are all going to have to take a bite of this massive sh*t sandwich.

one last chance to stop it :-\ perhaps? Senate...

[Task Force]

Hmm, what kind of s*** is on this s*** sandwich...:hmmm:

[GoldenRivet]

gooey yellow baby diarrhea. :rotfl2:

[Task Force]

Hmm... wonder if its anything like mustard....:hmmm::rotfl2:

[GoldenRivet]

Well you have to consider that every one of these government programs

medicare medicaid social security etc etc

they are BROKE, BANKRUPT... KAPUT.

now this???

why why why does each generation continue to let these morons burden the later generations with failing federal programs???

[CaptainHaplo]

Its not a done deal by any means. The senate has to pass a version, then both sides have to REVOTE on the "committe" bill that is the merger of the two. There are substantial differences between the two proposals.

On top of it, even if it breezes by (and don't count on that), it doesn't go into effect immediately. 2010 could very likely see the entire thing flipped on its head depending on the makeup of congress at that time.

The democrats have also seriously miscalculated or overlooked one major point that could invalidate the entire bill on the inevitable court challenge. While there are many, the house bill has a specific clause that will cause them no end of heartache due to its unconstitutionality. The bill does something never done, as a mandate from the government to the citizenry which go well beyond its role in the constitution.

I don't see this being corrected in committee either. The battle is NOT over, it fact, its just heating up.

[GoldenRivet]

all valid points.

I just cant believe im witnessing it.

How dare they tell me what i have to do with my medical care... thats between me and my doctor:nope:

[nikimcbee]

it's up to the senate now:nope:. I think these guys see the writing on the wall. They've got to pass all of their wacky stuff now before they get run outta office in 2010:dead:.

[Rilder]

We are all going to die!!!

The death panels are going to order you to your death!!!

:rotfl2:

[Sea Demon]

We are all going to die!!!

The death panels are going to order you to your death!!!

:rotfl2:


Not necessarily. Yet, if you don't buy a health plan, as mandated by the government, you can be imprisoned and fined. It's in the bill. Love that "Hope" and "change" thing. :dead: In addition, if you are under 25 years old, your premiums are likely going to double. Ain't that sweet? Those who are under 25 are going to subsidize and pay for people over 55 years old, and go bankrupt in the process. We're talking 1.22 Trillion so far, and we know that's bogus. It will be much higher at the end of it all. The joke is on any Democrat 25 years or younger. You screwed yourself over. And you thought Democrats were going to "give" you "quality" healthcare at low cost.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10933

I guess some people want to live in a nation where government forces you to buy goods and services you may not want with the threats of fines and imprisonments. In addition give you deficits out to infinity. What is it about freedom and personal liberty that Democrats can't seem to handle? The one thing we know for sure, Democrats have a particular disdain for personal liberty and responsibility. They also seem to find the concept of "Representative Government" not to their liking as well. Forcing this healthcare bill down the throats of an unwilling people of this nation (who don't want it) on the dark hours of a weekend is living proof of that. 54% of this nation don't want this crap.

[baggygreen]

I'm surprised you're not more concerned about the democrats passing the cap and trade in the committee, without any of the republicans present?

[Platapus]

I won't opine on it until I have read it. However I am not looking forward to 1900 pages of governmenteze. :nope:

[Platapus]

And, of course, it is important to note that this is just the House version, the Senate will have their version and the two will need to be combined and voted upon.

Miles to go before we sleep.

[SteamWake]

Were all going to die eventually yes.

On friday there was a march by 10's of thousands of citizens shouting "kill the bill". Pelosi's quote (paraphrased) They will be heard but it wont change anything :damn: Of course there just a bunch of crazy right wing nut jobs waving their bibles and dont really know whats good for them and their country.

On SATURDAY ! They pas the bill while everyone is busy looking at their football games and such.

God help us all.

lets just hope the senate will 'hear' us.

[Oberon]

So, when will Texas declare independence? :hmmm:

[SteamWake]

I'm surprised you're not more concerned about the democrats passing the cap and trade in the committee, without any of the republicans present?

You werent supposed to notice that. Pay no attention to that looky over here....

Their behaviour is decetful at best.

[Oberon]

Their behaviour is decetful at best.

They're politicians... :hmmm:

[Sailor Steve]

I dont know how you get $1.3 TRILLION from taxing only those individuals that earn over 500K per year...
I was having an argument about this with a friend this morning. Of course congress, and even senators, and even the prez don't make 500 thou per year. They only make $100 thousand, $150 thousand and $400 thousand (unless I missed the last raise). And of course they have their own health and retirement plans, which to my mind puts them at least on a par with the worst of the rich CEOs.

I think the first reform should be to make congress stop being a part of the rich elite, and make it back into citizens serving their country.

[AVGWarhawk]

They have three years to implement this if it passes both houses and Barry's desk correct? Let see how the political red tape extends this way beyond 3 years for this to kick in. The deal is not done but something will pass. So, welcome to the screw'in....:up:

[Task Force]

Well... Government healthcare here we come...:rotfl2:(wonder if its like there government cheese...)

[AVGWarhawk]

It is not necessary goverment healthcare yet. It is an option for people who take jobs that do not offer health care(I have no idea why they would do that) and others who perhaps run a business making this program affordable for them. Not sure. I did read yesterday that ALL must be on it or get a very stiff fine and or jail time. Really man, all must contribute to enjoy this program. I'm sick of free loaders.

I was with my brother-in-law last night at the market getting formula for his twins. He is behind a customer at the check out and they had two cart loads of food. ALL of it was paid on food stamps. $400.00 worth! They were eating better them me and him. They were dressed nice and wearing expensive leather jackets. They loaded the groceries into a Lexus....WTF? Our system here is for crappy at best.

[ETR3(SS)]

Not necessarily. Yet, if you don't buy a health plan, as mandated by the government, you can be imprisoned and fined. Would this be Congressman Bachus version (if I remember my crooked politicians correctly)? I believe he proposed to fine individuals and families that didn't obtain health insurance.

[mookiemookie]

This bill is nothing but a bailout for the insurance companies disguised as reform. The only really good thing in it is the mandate to cover pre-existing conditions. The "public option" in this one is weakened in a stupid concession to people who would have never voted yes on this anyways.

The insurance companies are the only winners here.

[don1reed]

Well you have to consider that every one of these government programs

medicare medicaid social security etc etc

they are BROKE, BANKRUPT... KAPUT.


Golden Rivet, Do you have a source for the above quote please?

The reason I ask is that I use medicare and receive Social Security, and being retired military am also receiving healthcare from a Federal Program that works very well. tnx.

[CaptainHaplo]

Don

First of - thank you brother for your service.

As for the solvency of Social Security - allow me to send you here:

http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/29/news/economy/fixing_social_security.fortune/index.htm

Note its CNN, not some "wacko" Fox link, because some would dismiss out of hand anything that was from there. The author even states how this has been a looming problem for decades. There have been actions to work on its financial standings, which is why the following was published by the Brookings Institute:

http://www.brookings.edu/multimedia/video/2009/0514_social_security_aaron.aspx

Allow me to quote another article dated 5/15 of this year....

"For years Social Security and Medicare have been saying that they’re running out of money. But, until now, the date of insolvency was years away.

The just-released Social Security trustees report (http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html) says that Medicare will be spending more than it brings in this year. In less than a decade, the system will have run through all of its savings and be incapable of paying bills."

Thats right - Medicare is running a deficit - THIS YEAR. *That extra 500 Billion coming out in "health care reform" is really gonna help that too huh? As for Social Security, it is projected to hit deficit spending in 2037. Source is:

http://moneywatch.bnet.com/saving-money/blog/devil-details/could-you-die-faster-medicares-broke/290/

The links themselves will take you to the trustees report if you want to read it yourself.

To say SS is broke right now, isn't entirely accurate, though one could say that of Medicare. Just remember that the trustees oversee both sets of trusts, so they share a common thread.

We could also point to a number of other government overseen programs/institutions that continue to be in the red every year... but I think you get the point. Hopefully this helps you understand the seriousness of the crisis the country faces with the existing debt added to the entitlements that will increase that burden on future generations.

[don1reed]

tnx for your reply CaptainHaplo.

Yes, I've read the SS trustee's report before. At my age the year 2037, actuarially speaking, is way beyond my time frame. And yet, contrary to GoldenRivet’s remarks, SS is not “KAPUT”, not yet anyway. Congress has 28 years left to fix it. Congressmen elected in 2006 will have (earned) a nice retirement by then if they stay in office, so I’ll keep my fingers crossed.

Medicare, on the other hand, I’ll agree, is looking shabby. The debate rages on and I believe the problem could be fixed to extend it’s solvency through the elimination of double-dipping by “Medicare Advantage”. It was my understanding that the “Healthcare Bill” currently passed by the house, plans to pay for some and/or all of the costs through money saved from ending “Medicare Advantage”. Like most here, I have not yet read the “bill”. but, while still alive, my RON site will have every other man on alert and weapons facing outward per SOP.

Cheers,

[AVGWarhawk]

This bill is nothing but a bailout for the insurance companies disguised as reform. The only really good thing in it is the mandate to cover pre-existing conditions. The "public option" in this one is weakened in a stupid concession to people who would have never voted yes on this anyways.

The insurance companies are the only winners here.

Mookie, did you read the 1900 page bill? I sure didn't. I'm not trying to be funny here but what makes you believe the insurance companies are the winners? I do not follow your logic.

[mookiemookie]

Mookie, did you read the 1900 page bill? I sure didn't. I'm not trying to be funny here but what makes you believe the insurance companies are the winners? I do not follow your logic.

The government has just delivered millions of new customers to the insurance companies by mandating that the uninsured purchase insurance. Oh sure they're being subsidized by the government, but the insurers who are the root of the problem are the end recipients of those government subsidies.

It really doesn't do a whole lot to end the insurance companies stranglehold on our health care system. The public option is so watered down and weak that it doesn't do anything to actually solve any problems. It was done in an attempt to appease Republicans, and now when it doesn't work, they're going to scream "SEE WE TOLD YOU SO!"

It's like solving the homeless problem by passing a law stating that all the homeless people need to buy houses.

[AVGWarhawk]

The government has just delivered millions of new customers to the insurance companies by mandating that the uninsured purchase insurance. Oh sure they're being subsidized by the government, but the insurers who are the root of the problem are the end recipients of those government subsidies.

It really doesn't do a whole lot to end the insurance companies stranglehold on our health care system. The public option is so watered down and weak that it doesn't do anything to actually solve any problems. It was done in an attempt to appease Republicans, and now when it doesn't work, they're going to scream "SEE WE TOLD YOU SO!"

It's like solving the homeless problem by passing a law stating that all the homeless people need to buy houses.

Ok, got it. Personally, in my mind Obama is just attempting to create a legacy for himself via this healthcare bill. He does not care if he wins 2012. He does not care about a public option. He will move along in 2012 and write books until he is old and gray. At any rate, that opinion is soley my own. As it stands now Lieberman said he will not vote this bill in. Apparently Lieberman's vote is needed. Just another government snafu!

[Carotio]

the field of medicine will no longer be a profitable and desirable industry for people to enter as hospital costs rise and profits fall... so shall salaries.

:o:o:o
Anyone in Gods own country remember the story of the mercifull Samaritan?
Since there was no benifit to themselves, the first people passed by, leaving the poor guy in the dust, till the mercifull Samaritan came by.
Though I'm not particular religious, this story does appeal to me.
Do you really need to benifit yourself to help others?
Do you really need to make a huge profit, if you're a doctor?

I guess, again this is a mentality difference between Europeans and Americans.

Let those doctors who wish to make profit work in the field of plastic surgery, like enlarging boobs, removing fat or reworking faces of Hollywood celebs, which is not lifethreatening demands, and then let the real caring doctors really help all the ill people.

[AVGWarhawk]

Do you really need to benifit yourself to help others?
Do you really need to make a huge profit, if you're a doctor?

I guess, again this is a mentality difference between Europeans and Americans.

Let those doctors who wish to make profit work in the field of plastic surgery, like enlarging boobs, removing fat or reworking faces of Hollywood celebs, which is not lifethreatening demands, and then let the real caring doctors really help all the ill people.

I have but one answer for this....tort cases. Malpractice insurance is just over the top and rightly so when a doctor can be sued at a tip of hat. Imagine, malpractice insurance is over 100k+ per year per doctor. Now, to be sure, some patience are due compensation for wrong doing but by and large most cases are fraud. This is just one part of the system that needs to be fixed.

[GoldenRivet]

:o:o:o
Anyone in Gods own country remember the story of the mercifull Samaritan?
Since there was no benifit to themselves, the first people passed by, leaving the poor guy in the dust, till the mercifull Samaritan came by.
Though I'm not particular religious, this story does appeal to me.
Do you really need to benifit yourself to help others?
Do you really need to make a huge profit, if you're a doctor?


Hate to break it to you, but being in a family that is made up of about 90% surgeons, Nurses, Anesthesiologists and Hospital Administators... i know a lot of young people both related to me and not related to me who are in the entering college age group who are entering the field of medicine.

they all have the "like to help people" thing going on which is great...

but consistently the number one or number two attractant to the health care industry in these individuals is the high salaries and the rather exceptional quality of life that Doctors and Surgeons and Anesthesiologists are able to live.

I have asked every single one of them... "would you go through with your plans to become a surgeon, digging jars of Jelly out of an obese man's anus (true) or digging into the guts of an aids infected patient if the pie in the sky salary drastically dropped down to $100K or less?"

UNIVERSALLY the answer was not no...

it was HELL NO.

when you start fining health care providers for providing health care, and when you start pressing the sorts of taxes and fines etc on the health care system you WILL see roving salary reductions... that is a FACT as plain as day... when these administrators start having to pay more out to the federal government and start having to take on the sort of health care structure the president is pushing - extra money will have to come from somewhere... and that WILL be the employees of the hospital from top to bottom pay cuts are just a fact of the health care package.

this is the opinion of every doctor, every nurse, every physical therapist, every anesthesiologists and every hospital administrator i have had the privilege of discussing this issue with.


If it were up to the truly selfless people of the world to provide all the health care... the line into all three hospitals in the world would be hundreds of miles long.

[AVGWarhawk]

I have asked every single one of them... "would you go through with your plans to become a surgeon, digging jars of Jelly out of an obese man's anus (true) or digging into the guts of an aids infected patient if the pie in the sky salary drastically dropped down to $100K or less?"

UNIVERSALLY the answer was not no...

it was HELL NO.

Yep, being an ER physician all his life, my dad can hardly walk now with all the walking he did on 12 hour shifts 4 night straight every week in the ER. Telling parents their child has died. Telling elderly that their spouse has died. Keeping half living bodies alive in the ER until surgeons can arrive. For a better part of my childhood he worked all the holidays. That crap takes it toll. I certainly would not do it for minimum wage. No sir. I have seen first hand what it did to my dad. My sister is a nurse and she worked in geriatric. She is out of it now. The elderly who were ignored by their family as they passed their waining days in the old folks home got to her mentally. Especially when Monday she is talking to them and come Tuesday the person is dead. Not my cup of tea for $7.50/hour and all the lawsuits you can swallow.

[GoldenRivet]

AVG is correct.

both of my parents routinely sleep in a hospital lounge, or call room 3 or 4 nights per week waiting for trauma cases to come in.

My mother routinely has to tell parents that their child is dead, or that the father of the family has been killed in a wreck.

i would estimate her annual salary to be $250K

in her words... its still not enough money to deal with the psychological and physiological stress day in and day out.

The president's bill will gain no sympathy from me... it is another case of a big wig wanting more for less.

[AVGWarhawk]

This is going to kill a lot of careers on Capital Hill and will probably kill this bill. To me, this is probably the largest issue of all concerning this bill.



An amendment included in the House health care bill (http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/11/everybody-wins-little-incentive-for-compromise-as-both-sides-celebrate-health-care-vote.html) passed this weekend promising to restrict federal funding for abortions (http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=9026911) has reignited a fiery debate on one of the most controversial issues in the country.


http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/abortion-amendment-health-care-bills-ignites-debate-womens/story?id=9034995

[AVGWarhawk]

Sadly, with this and all the bailouts Obama is effectivly intruding in our lives. He is intruding more than any president that went before. Soon government will have ownership in all and done so with our tax dollars. :down:

[KeybdFlyer]

My wife & I would like to thank those of you in this thread who are against this bill for your unstinting opposition to it. She, at slightly less than my 61 years, fell down the stairs of our apartment just short of 4 months ago but has yet to receive any form of treatment for the agonising pain she is in - save for the nightly heat packs I apply to her arm, shoulder and hip. We do not know what damage has been done, nor will we ever, as we cannot afford private health insurance.

In May of this year, I began passing blood along with my urine. I do not know why this happened or if it is anything "serious", nor am I likely ever to do so as long as insurance companies charge premiums that exceed the amount of disposable income we have available to us.

Whilst I feel genuine sympathy for the plight of the mother of one of the contributors to the thread, who receives a pitiable $250k for her emotionally painful duty to inform parents of the death of their child, my sympathy is tempered by the knowledge that that figure is slightly over eleven (11) times the income my wife and I exist on. I will make the assumption that she also receives medical insurance through her employer.

My wife endured the emotionally distressing procedure of an hysterectomy just over four years ago. We are still paying-off that bill, which is bad enough in itself, what is really galling is that the amount still owing is only $1000 less than the original bill. After four years.

Yes. It is truly heartwarming to see that there are so many people who oppose anything at all if it means rubbing their political fur the wrong way, or possibly adding a few dollars to their taxes or removing a few more from multi-billion dollar "industries" (I remember when they used to call themselves "services", but any idea of serving the public vanished decades ago). Thank you all for playing your part in ensuring that both our lives will continue to be lived with fear of contracting an illness, or meeting with an accident, or simply of getting even older.

Thank you one and all.

[antikristuseke]

In case someone missed it, I think KeybdFlyer is being sarcastic.:D

[AVGWarhawk]

Sacastic or not, medschool is not free and goes far beyond just the 4 years in college. Malpractic insurance is not cheap. I guess he did not look into that. Mentally, medicine takes it toll on doctor/nurse, physically as well. Just like cops, they get to work the the real cream of the crop. What, does every Tom, Dick and Harry show up in the ER with a boo boo? Lets try broken bodies from accidents. Gunshot wounds to the head. Raped women and girls. In short go spend a 12 hour shift in the ER and experience it. When an old man is pronounced dead in front of you what a doctor does takes on a whole new meaning. Until one experiences what goes on in the ER they have very little room to comment. George Clooney getting banged on a gurney is not how it is. :03:

BTW, it is not rubbing the fur in the wrong way. It is more freeloading that will happen. You nailed it on the head, a few dollars each week. Fine, works for me. If you do not contribute you do not get treatment but ya know what, that ain't gonna happen. I pay my premium and a few dollars for Tom, Dick and Harry.....add anyone else who does not wish to contribute on top of that. This is how it will work. It is a crap bill set up by a friggin house mom by the name of Pelosi. Get real.

No sarcasim!

[mookiemookie]

My wife & I would like to thank those of you in this thread who are against this bill for your unstinting opposition to it. She, at slightly less than my 61 years, fell down the stairs of our apartment just short of 4 months ago but has yet to receive any form of treatment for the agonising pain she is in - save for the nightly heat packs I apply to her arm, shoulder and hip. We do not know what damage has been done, nor will we ever, as we cannot afford private health insurance.

In May of this year, I began passing blood along with my urine. I do not know why this happened or if it is anything "serious", nor am I likely ever to do so as long as insurance companies charge premiums that exceed the amount of disposable income we have available to us.

Whilst I feel genuine sympathy for the plight of the mother of one of the contributors to the thread, who receives a pitiable $250k for her emotionally painful duty to inform parents of the death of their child, my sympathy is tempered by the knowledge that that figure is slightly over eleven (11) times the income my wife and I exist on. I will make the assumption that she also receives medical insurance through her employer.

My wife endured the emotionally distressing procedure of an hysterectomy just over four years ago. We are still paying-off that bill, which is bad enough in itself, what is really galling is that the amount still owing is only $1000 less than the original bill. After four years.

Yes. It is truly heartwarming to see that there are so many people who oppose anything at all if it means rubbing their political fur the wrong way, or possibly adding a few dollars to their taxes or removing a few more from multi-billion dollar "industries" (I remember when they used to call themselves "services", but any idea of serving the public vanished decades ago). Thank you all for playing your part in ensuring that both our lives will continue to be lived with fear of contracting an illness, or meeting with an accident, or simply of getting even older.

Thank you one and all.


My sympathies to you and your situation. This is precisely the sort of thing that I cannot believe happens in our country every day. It's not fair and its not right.

[KeybdFlyer]

Sacastic or not, medschool is not free and goes far beyond just the 4 years in college. Malpractic insurance is not cheap. I guess he did not look into that. Mentally, medicine takes it toll on doctor/nurse, physically as well. Just like cops, they get to work the the real cream of the crop. What, does every Tom, Dick and Harry show up in the ER with a boo boo? Lets try broken bodies from accidents. Gunshot wounds to the head. Raped women and girls. In short go spend a 12 hour shift in the ER and experience it. When an old man is pronounced dead in front of you what a doctor does takes on a whole new meaning. Until one experiences what goes on in the ER they have very little room to comment. George Clooney getting banged on a gurney is not how it is. :03:

Which was not my intended point in any way. I wouldn't do their job for the world - couldn't, in fact. But I would dearly like to be able to get medical advice when something goes amiss. I could respond by saying that those entering the profession know what is ahead of them before deciding on that career. But, of course, I won't. :03:

@mookiemookie Thank you. But again, wasn't my intention (to receive sympathy). There are a lot worse-off people around than us.

[GoldenRivet]

keybdflyer.

my wife took a tumble down the stairs as well.

our insurance didnt cover much it.

still barely covers a portion of her $30,000 per year in lovenox injections she has to take in order to continue to live as a result of DVT.

funny how my wife received IMMEDIATE and effective medical care for the same problem your wife faced. im not sure how that works.

perhaps it because our government is not in the business of "taking care of us"?

i didnt want government health care then.

dont want it now.

[AVGWarhawk]

Which was not my intended point in any way. I wouldn't do their job for the world - couldn't, in fact. But I would dearly like to be able to get medical advice when something goes amiss. I could respond by saying that those entering the profession know what is ahead of them before deciding on that career. But, of course, I won't. :03:

@mookiemookie Thank you. But again, wasn't my intention (to receive sympathy). There are a lot worse-off people around than us.

Know what chief, my old man knew exactly what was ahead of him. As an intern he would delivery babies for poor black families. The family would give him a quarter which he did not take. Left it on the kitchen table. Please, a doctor is not a souless person only in it for the money. The job does that too him. You see brains spilled and gored bodies for a while...it will take it's toll. The worst for him was pronouning a child dead and telling the parents. Good luck keeping a straight mind doing that day in and day out. When I was a kid he would sit silent for a day or so. We knew something bad happened at the ER. He would eventually talk about it. Again, it ain't ER with George Clooney or House. That is made for TV.

BTW, over here the wife could go to the ER and so could you. I pay additional on my premiums for the uninsured. The ER would not turn you away. I have no issue with that...however, even some with insurance still can go bankrupt...the entire system needs to be overhauled not just have more money thrown at it. What else can I tell you?

[KeybdFlyer]

The ER, as is rightly pointed out, will not turn you away. But they will present you with a nice bill for the treatment. When I suggested calling an ambulance, wifey almost burst a blood-vessel in her attempts to stop me. I'm apologise for being one of the great unwashed who can't afford $75 to see a primary care-giver much less the $150 she was telling me the ER would charge. I feel I ought also to point-out that I am pretty vague when it comes to the actual workings of most American systems such as Health Care, as I've never needed to use any of them until the past 9-10 months. So there's not much use throwing figures and statistics at me - I won't get the point. The only fact I know is that when I lived in England, I paid the equivalent of about $25 a week in National Insurance (I'm sure it'll be a lot more than that now) and whenever I needed medical advice or treatment, I just went and got it. Not saying it was a better system, not saying the treatment was better, not trying to start an argument. Just trying, unsuccessfully it seems, to say that almost anything would be better than what is available here at the moment.

btw. I'm a Lieutenant, not a chief. The avatar says so. :D

[Takeda Shingen]

btw. I'm a Lieutenant, not a chief. The avatar says so. :D

Oh, this will be well-received.

[AVGWarhawk]

The ER, as is rightly pointed out, will not turn you away. But they will present you with a nice bill for the treatment. When I suggested calling an ambulance, wifey almost burst a blood-vessel in her attempts to stop me. I'm apologise for being one of the great unwashed who can't afford $75 to see a primary care-giver much less the $150 she was telling me the ER would charge. I feel I ought also to point-out that I am pretty vague when it comes to the actual workings of most American systems such as Health Care, as I've never needed to use any of them until the past 9-10 months. So there's not much use throwing figures and statistics at me - I won't get the point. The only fact I know is that when I lived in England, I paid the equivalent of about $25 a week in National Insurance (I'm sure it'll be a lot more than that now) and whenever I needed medical advice or treatment, I just went and got it. Not saying it was a better system, not saying the treatment was better, not trying to start an argument. Just trying, unsuccessfully it seems, to say that almost anything would be better than what is available here at the moment.

btw. I'm a Lieutenant, not a chief. The avatar says so. :D

I understand you are not starting an argument but the system here is broken. For starters and I have stated this before, malpractic insurance is phenominal. My dad paid over $100k per year for insurance with his group of doctors that contracted on for the ER. Tort reform, although attempted in one state, needs to be done in all states and it needs to be scrutinized as much as each case should be. People sue at the drop of a hat. Case and point, man shows to my dad's ER. He is at the counter answering questions and has a massive heart failure. My dad arrives with a crash cart and revives this man. In the meantime, when the man went into heart failure he dropped to the floor and broke his nose in the process. So, as he lay dead with a broken nose my dad revives him. The mans wife started a lawsuit over the broken nose. That is a fine how do you do. Save her husbands life but sue because he broke his nose when he went down from cardiac arrest. At any rate, like you stated, the hospital gives you a bill. Well sure. They provided a service. Ok, fine. I have been paying premiums for years. So insurance pays for me. What is he difference? I already paid up front. What is the great mystery here. Ok, I paid $600.00/month for 12 months over 10 years. That is $72,000.00 dollars. Sure, I went in for a sniffle or my spondaneous pneumothorax and I was covered. Well sure, I paid in advance! It is like paying for an extended warranty on your new car purchase. Basically you are paying for repairs in advance. See what I mean? At any rate, you said you paid $25.00/week for healthcare. That is swell. However, why must I pay $25.00 for the government program which will be crap and also pay for what I have now which is good? Do you see the picture now? So, not only am I paying higher premiums for the uninsured already but I will have to pay additional to take care of everyone. This does not seem right. Why should I have to do that. How does this benefit me? All it is does is benefit those that are taking from the system already. I'm a bit tired of paying for that also. If it was so cut and dry there would not be a 1900 page bill full of legal jargon that was crafted by a tired old hag named Pelosi. Once again this is being shoved down our throats and we have no say. As you can see, this runs deeper than just a healthcare bill. This is another and one of many to come were the people have zero say about it. As of now the government has intruded on our lives more than any government at any time. What they are doing makes the Patriot Act look like a comic book. If they want healthcare for all then create a program that is affordable. Leave me out of paying for it if I do not use the program.

No argument, just a general understand of how screwed the system is and throwing more of my money at it is not the answer. It is just a damn Obama legacy he dreaming of and Pelosi's hope of making the history books. She does not give a crap about anyone's health. She is covered and that is all she needs to know.

[CaptainHaplo]

OK forgive me for asking a few questions here....

Your apparently under the age of 65, so your not on Medicare.

Your obviously retired by choice, or disabled by requirement, since you mentioned the "fixed income" fact.

You don't have health insurance through any private entity.

If your retired by choice, why are you not going out and doing for yourself for a time while things are tight? I don't mean to be an A$$, but if your retired and not able to do the things you want or need to, then you need to step up and do for yourself, not gripe about how those of us who do work don't want to pay for your health care. Alot of folks are doing things they don't want - like working 2 jobs, to make ends meet.

If your disabled and thus unable to do for yourself, then your entitled to Medicare even if your not 65 or over. There is a waiting period, but for folks on SSD, the income is low enough to entitle you to get Medicaid until Medicare kicks in. Sure, it takes swallowing some pride and going to the office with all the people who don't speak english, but its there for you. If you can't swallow pride enough to do that, why are you here telling people "thanks" for not wanting to give MORE of a handout?

Again with the comment of "fixed income", just note that often times that income is low enough to qualify you for help. Go get it, instead of denigrating those of us who are already providing help for a lot of people as it is and not wanting to create more government ENTITLEMENTS.

Also, and this is not aimed but is a simple comment. Live within your means. Can't find anything to cut back on? Call me a self righteous elitist, but I have had times when I have had to say no to the internet, unlimited long distance calling plans, cable or satellite TV, etc etc... to make sure the important things were taken care of.

I am not trying to give anyone a hard time, but the reality is that there IS a safety net already there, and I am already paying for it. I really don't appreciate someone complaining because the net wasn't big enough to catch them.....

Its like telling the fireman who just saved you from your burning home how crappy he is because he didn't save the house too when you started the fire by smoking in bed.

[AVGWarhawk]

He is in the US Capthaplo. I do not know how the lack of healthcare insurance is handled for the individual in his country. Although I agree with your assessment for people in the US. The safety nets are there.

[CaptainHaplo]

Keybd.. - I am not trying to single you out, don't feel targetted. There are different systems, but ultimately, since your in the US now, there are options for you.

I don't want you or your wife to suffer. No one should need to. That's why there are the nets out there. But those of us providing the nets have gotten tired of being told we aren't doing enough, while we see people abuse the system, milk it for all its worth, and refuse to do for themselves. That is why I say avail yourself of the things that are there, or do for yourself, or both.

I will keep you both in my prayers as well.

[KeybdFlyer]

To CaptainHaplo: Hey, I don't feel targeted or singled out! :) It's always interesting (read that as "good") to hear other people's points of view on any subject whatsoever.

At this point I had typed a whole paragraph explaining my (our) situation, but decided against it as it would only lead to further "discussion", which I see has already become way too heated for truly objective debate.

Apart from my age, all your other assumptions about me were incorrect, lol. A public forum, however, isn't a place I'd want to discuss my personal circumstances - indeed, the only point I ever had in mind when I made that first post some hours back, was to try to show that there are a lot of people out there who would dearly like to have an option to obtain health care at a cost they could afford - I used myself as an example only. Not to plead my plight. :)

"Living within one's means"? A nice thought. I know you didn't mean it to sound critical so I didn't take it that way, but we don't have cable, or satellite or a telephone. The car we have was given to us (a 14yr old clunker, but it goes!) BUT... once a year, around March, we receive a tax refund which affords us the opportunity to treat ourselves. This year it was my turn, so I bought a computer. You could argue that I should have bought a year's-worth of health insurance, lol. Well, it would have covered three month's-worth anyway. My only defence is that we look upon that money as our Christmas, by the time Dec 25th arrives there's no spare cash for gifts, lol.

I mention all of the above solely because you asked. No whining, no complaining. All-in-all, I consider myself quite lucky; I have a wonderful and loving wife and a roof over my head. As I have already said, there are far worse-off people around, I know two on a personal basis, one a lad of 22 and the other a widow of 68. But they have no-one to speak for them or plead their case.

Finally - I loved your analogy. That's a compliment, I'm not being sarcastic. And thank you for your prayers - they're appreciated. I hope you include all those who are dying for want of professional treatment as well. (And THAT wasn't meant in any other way except sincerely - I understand that in a textual message, intonation is completely lacking and therefore the words can be misunderstood, please don't misunderstand mine.)

[nikimcbee]

Our health system may have issues:doh:, but I wouldn't trade it for anything. Ore-gone has a state funded medical system, and they are the biggest deniers of care! The creator of the oregon system has called it a total failure. I can't wait to have the state tell me that "we don't cover" that expensive insulin anymore, but we will cover this 40 yr old beef insulin:yeah:. When I had my eye issues, do you know how long I had to wait to see a doctor? 1 hour. And do you know how long it took to see a specialist? 2 hours later THAT DAY! Socialized medicine can't deliver that level of service, so take your DMV medical coverage and shove it!:yeah:

I don't want sub standard medical coverage for everybody. Just wait for the first doctor's strike because they aren't happy with their pay:yeah:.

There has to be a better solution than gov't managed~run health care.

[GoldenRivet]

I would settle for some sort of insurance reform.

but how dare the government mandate to the people that they HAVE to buy a particular product or service???

Congress needs to...

1. Print money
2. levy taxes
3. Manage national defense
4. manage interstate and international trade
5. leave everything else the hell alone.

[Sea Demon]

Our health system may have issues:doh:, but I wouldn't trade it for anything.

There has to be a better solution than gov't managed~run health care.

Thank you. I very much agree. Basically you have like 3.3% of the American population chronically unable to afford coverage. They have access to healthcare in the ER and such, but they don't pay for any coverage. Do we really want or need to overhaul the entire health care system by putting government in complete command control of it? Like Democrats are telling us we need to. I say no. Not just no....but Hell no! Open up the competition among carriers in the various states is a good way to spur more competition without soaking the taxpayers, and creating another layer of unneeded and very expensive bureacracy. The government needs to change the rules and get the hell out of the way, and provide nothing more than oversight. Nothing more. If competition is what's needed...let the insurance companies compete.

[nikimcbee]

I would settle for some sort of insurance reform.

but how dare the government mandate to the people that they HAVE to buy a particular product or service???

Congress needs to...

1. Print money
2. levy taxes
3. Manage national defense
4. manage interstate and international trade
5. leave everything else the hell alone.

If this whole thing winds up passing, I wonder if they could get it ruled as un-constitutional, as with many of FDr's policies?

[AVGWarhawk]

Thank you. I very much agree. Basically you have like 3.3% of the American population chronically unable to afford coverage. They have access to healthcare in the ER and such, but they don't pay for any coverage. Do we really want or need to overhaul the entire health care system by putting government in complete command control of it? Like Democrats are telling us we need to. I say no. Not just no....but Hell no! Open up the competition among carriers in the various states is a good way to spur more competition without soaking the taxpayers, and creating another layer of unneeded and very expensive bureacracy. The government needs to change the rules and get the hell out of the way, and provide nothing more than oversight. Nothing more. If competition is what's needed...let the insurance companies compete.

To comment on your last few sentences and what I have been harping all along...the system needs to be fixed. Throwing tax money at it to cover more people under a broken system is not the answer and will never be the answer.

More and more this is looking to be nothing more than a Obama legacy he has been crafting over many years as he worked his way to the Presidency. I believe we are looking at a 4 year Obama and out.....

[geetrue]

Why pass a bill so bloated and out of control before it takes effect?

They say you won't even start getting any health care help for four years after the health care bill passes (if it passes)

Why not take another year and spend some serious public tax money of say 1 bilion dollars to study the problem of spending 1.3 trillion dollars and then present a well thought out plan for health care.

and why do they confuse the problem with saying this is all based on a ten year forecast.

Why ten years?

Where is the 500 billion dollars in cut medicare spending coming from?

is that a one time cut or counted as a ten year savings.

How can you honestly say this won't cost the American public something?

You can't ...

It is reported that the nations ER rooms are operating at a 2 billion dollar a year loss ... heck just give them an extra four billion dollars a year and take care of a lot of the problems they want to solve in this health care bill.

[AVGWarhawk]

Why pass a bill so bloated and out of control before it takes effect?

They say you won't even start getting any health care help for four years after the health care bill passes (if it passes)

Why not take another year and spend some serious public tax money of say 1 bilion dollars to study the problem of spending 1.3 trillion dollars and then present a well thought out plan for health care.

and why do they confuse the problem with saying this is all based on a ten year forecast.

Why ten years?

Where is the 500 billion dollars in cut medicare spending coming from?

is that a one time cut or counted as a ten year savings.

How can you honestly say this won't cost the American public something?

You can't ...

It is reported that the nations ER rooms are operating at a 2 billion dollar a year loss ... heck just give them an extra four billion dollars a year and take care of a lot of the problems they want to solve in this health care bill.


Yeah sure geetrue...throw logic in our face...see if we care. :O: What you are saying makes to much sense and that does not follow in DC. Yesterday Bill Clinton was pushing and saying hurry hurry get it passed. Get the ball rolling. That is all this is....getting the ball rolling. That strategy sucks...plain and simple. So much more needs to be looked at and you know what, if they took the time to do so a bill could be drafted that could possibly get countrywide approval. But no, they are going to hurry and slap together a crap bill riddle with holes and open ended directives. All this in the name of getting the ball rolling. All of this to make the people feel excluded and railroaded much like we have been in the past 9 months. :down:

[GoldenRivet]

That is one thing i have never trusted about this bill.

everyone who is in favor of it seems to be in such a rush and insists that it is the best for the nation... but they hold all their meetings behind closed doors on nights when most normal Americans are watching the football game.

"no no no dont look at the facts just pass it, it will be ok just hurry!! hurry!!! get this thing going pass it now! do it pass it now!!!"

lets look at a scenario for a moment...

You have a motor company that builds cars. 90% of the cars they have EVER built are junk... but now they have come out with this newest model. There is not a great deal of information about it available to you, but it advertises a lot of horsepower and options... sticker price: $150,000.00

would you buy it if the dealership's sales pitch was:

"Its cool bra... just buy it, but whatever you do buy it before lunch time! Interest rate??? forget that, its got leather seats! hurry up and buy this thing! warranty? you know if it costs 100 thousand dollars it MUST have a decent warranty right? forget that, just take my advice... buy this car RIGHT NOW AND HURRY!"

no... you wouldnt buy it. not only is it out of your budget by a WIDE margin... but the dealer has given you almost no facts or information about the vehicle.

so why are there ANY people willing to buy a $1,300,000,000,000.00 health care package which you know almost nothing about when certain political individuals are using that exact same sales pitch???

We need health care reform in America. everyone with half a brain knows that

but this particular package is not the answer.

lets do something bipartisan, lets do a few years of research to assure the best possible deal for everyone, lets do the homework now so we get a good grade on the test later.

i think that is a concept we can all agree on for the time being.

[Task Force]

I wouldnt buy that car... Too many 0s for my budget...:rotfl2:

[GoldenRivet]

I wouldnt buy that car... Too many 0s for my budget...:rotfl2:

strap this number to your sore wallet

$1,300,000,000,000.00

that translates to a little over $4,300 in annual taxes PER PERSON IN THE USA (man woman and child)

thats an aweful lot of zeros to be DEMANDING from the public for a health care system that will no doubt be broken and flawed when my children are my age - especially when asking for that cash during the "worst recession in decades".

[AVGWarhawk]

Just what is the carbon footprint of this car:hmmm:

[GoldenRivet]

Just what is the carbon footprint of this car:hmmm:

Carbon footprint?

dont hassle yourself with that AVG, it will all work itself out in the end! all you need to know is that this thing is sporty, and has a lot of sex appeal, but you MUST buy it in the next 2 hours! come on AVG, get out your check book and lets make a deal!!! hurry up, just dont ask all those silly questions! you are a serious buyer, hurry hurry hurry! sign here!!!

[GoldenRivet]

I'll add this to the discussion.

with respect to Queen Pelosi... the supreme governance of all the land is right here (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html).

Mrs. Pelosi, i recommend you read section 8 and STFU,

[antikristuseke]

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Providing general welfare includes health care in my book. Then again, I am of the opinion that hospitals should not run for profit, but that the wages of the staff be kept competitive.

That being said, this will probably fail because when you have two parties fighting for power which are nigh on identical in action, but diametrically opposed in rethoric it is hard to get something done.

[mookiemookie]

nigh on identical in action, but diametrically opposed in rethoric it is hard to get something done.

They've sure done a fine job of creating the illusion of choice, haven't they?

[CaptainHaplo]

AntiKrist....

It says "provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States" - not provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States CITIZENS.

Remember, the United States is two distinct words - UNITED - and STATES - aka a government that is to defend the STATES themselves, in aggregate, from any external aggressor. The system as defined in the constitution is about a federal government that is tasked to maintain the soveriegnty of each state, and resolve issues between them.

Not babysit every person in the nation. If your arguement were accurate, then its the government's job to provide me with a home, a car, all the food I need, my electricity and other untilities, as well as health care.

[Buddahaid]

AntiKrist....

...... If your arguement were accurate, then its the government's job to provide me with a home, a car, all the food I need, my electricity and other untilities, as well as health care.

Could it? I'd have more time to play Silent Hunter. :rock:

Buddahaid

[Platapus]

In reading the writings of James Madison, it appears that people have been debating this very issue of what does "Provide... for the general welfare of the United States" mean and not mean.

Both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were of the mindset that this clause did not grant congress unlimited powers.

So this is not a new debate nor one that is easily solved I am afraid. :nope:

Our Constitution, like other Constitutions, was a compromise and has different interpretations. Hence the need for a Supreme Court.

So far, the Supreme Court seems to be supportive of what Congress has been doing for at least the past 100 years.

[Platapus]

I'll add this to the discussion.

with respect to Queen Pelosi... the supreme governance of all the land is right here (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html).

Mrs. Pelosi, i recommend you read section 8 and STFU,


Well if you can find specific cases where Ms. Pelosi has violated the Constitution, why don't you call the clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States 202-479-3011 and let him know.

Or write to your congressional representatives and let them know.

If not, perhaps you are mistaken about who should STFU? :06:

[GoldenRivet]

by attempting to push through a bill which FORCES the American people to buy a government product or service - yeah IMHO thats unconstitutional, but according to you and a lot of other nuts in the religion of Pelosianity my opinion doesnt amount to a hill of crap.

i dont see that Congress has that right or power as laid out in the constitution to force me to buy something or pay a fine if i elect not to. whats next? resurrection of the Stamp Act???

way to take it personally there platapus

"Provide for the General Welfare of the United States" = Promote the well being of the nation (another failure on the part of congress by allowing so much of our vital industry to be exported to foreign shores amongst other things) the United States is a nation. the PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES is something else entirely.

I would completely understand if it had said...

"Provide for the General Welfare of the PEOPLE." which it most expressly does NOT say

i would assume that the framers of the constitution would have been smart enough to write that in if they had intended for the government to take complete and total care of every individual.

[mookiemookie]

to take complete and total care of every individual.

Oh lawdy the hyperbole is a flyin!

[JoeCorrado]

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/11/07/house-passes-historic-health-care-bill-long-road-ahead-for-ref/?icid=main|main|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.politic sdaily.com%2F2009%2F11%2F07%2Fhouse-passes-historic-health-care-bill-long-road-ahead-for-ref%2F (http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/11/07/house-passes-historic-health-care-bill-long-road-ahead-for-ref/?icid=main%7Cmain%7Cdl1%7Clink3%7Chttp%3A%2F%2Fwww .politicsdaily.com%2F2009%2F11%2F07%2Fhouse-passes-historic-health-care-bill-long-road-ahead-for-ref%2F)

I only hope that this EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE BILL is as successful as the messiah says it will be. i really do...

but i'm not optimistic... and i foresee ghetto like conditions throughout hospitals and clinics in the coming years.

the field of medicine will no longer be a profitable and desirable industry for people to enter as hospital costs rise and profits fall... so shall salaries.

I dont know how you get $1.3 TRILLION from taxing only those individuals that earn over 500K per year... if you ask me... we are all going to have to take a bite of this massive sh*t sandwich.

one last chance to stop it :-\ perhaps? Senate...

Happy for you that you were able to get that off of your chest.

Relax, it will all be OK.

The United States has officially entered the company of civilized nations... dragging the wealthiest kicking and screaming.

If you qualify as one of the "most wealthiest" then you have my hearty congratulations- and you also bear a responsibility to give a little back... at least that is what the rest of us have been told during the disaster that was Republican rule.

:woot:

[JoeCorrado]

AntiKrist....

It says "provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States" - not provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States CITIZENS.


We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#DOMTRAN), provide for the common defence (http://www.usconstitution.net/constmiss.html), promote the general Welfare (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#WELFARE), and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#POSTERITY), do ordain (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#ORDAIN) and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


BAM!! Your argument is shredded, and your premise is denied.- Have a nice day.

[Sailor Steve]

"Provide for the General Welfare of the United States" = Promote the well being of the nation (another failure on the part of congress by allowing so much of our vital industry to be exported to foreign shores amongst other things) the United States is a nation. the PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES is something else entirely.

I would completely understand if it had said...

"Provide for the General Welfare of the PEOPLE." which it most expressly does NOT say

i would assume that the framers of the constitution would have been smart enough to write that in if they had intended for the government to take complete and total care of every individual.
Haplo and GR: Next time there is an argument about what is supposed to be different about our country, please don't say "Of the people, by the people, FOR the people." I agree that the original concept was to protect individual freedom and autonomy for the citizens, but the wording has been argued about for as long as the ideas and ideals have. Nit-picking the wording to prove your point doesn't prove anything.

[Platapus]

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#DOMTRAN), provide for the common defence (http://www.usconstitution.net/constmiss.html), promote the general Welfare (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#WELFARE), and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#POSTERITY), do ordain (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#ORDAIN) and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


BAM!! Your argument is shredded, and your premise is denied.- Have a nice day.



That's a three pointer with nothing but net! :yeah:

[CaptainHaplo]

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#DOMTRAN), provide for the common defence (http://www.usconstitution.net/constmiss.html), promote the general Welfare (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#WELFARE), and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#POSTERITY), do ordain (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#ORDAIN) and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


BAM!! Your argument is shredded, and your premise is denied.- Have a nice day.


Well JoeCorrado - it seems you have a problem with the meaning of words if you think that... Lets look at the meaning of the words, shall we?

Provide:
–verb (used with object)
1. to make available; furnish: to provide employees with various benefits.
2. to supply or equip: to provide the army with new fighter planes.
3. to afford or yield.
4. Law. to arrange for or stipulate beforehand, as by a provision or proviso.
5. Archaic. to prepare or procure beforehand.

–verb (used without object)
6. to take measures with due foresight (usually fol. by for or against).
7. to make arrangements for supplying means of support, money, etc. (usually fol. by for): He provided for his children in his will.
8. to supply means of support (often fol. by for): to provide for oneself.

In other words - Provide for the Common Defense means the Federal government has a responsibility to "make it happen".

Promote:
1. to help or encourage to exist or flourish; further: to promote world peace. 2. to advance in rank, dignity, position, etc.
3. Education. to put ahead to the next higher stage or grade of a course or series of classes.
4. to aid in organizing (business undertakings).
5. to encourage the sales, acceptance, etc., of (a product), esp. through advertising or other publicity.
6. Informal. to obtain (something) by cunning or trickery; wangle.

Note that promote means the federal government is to HELP, ENCOURAGE and AID in making something happen - not REQUIRE it. In other words, they have no authority to MAKE anyone do anything "for their own good".

Words have meaning my friend, it helps if you know what those meanings are.......

[CaptainHaplo]

Haplo and GR: Next time there is an argument about what is supposed to be different about our country, please don't say "Of the people, by the people, FOR the people." I agree that the original concept was to protect individual freedom and autonomy for the citizens, but the wording has been argued about for as long as the ideas and ideals have. Nit-picking the wording to prove your point doesn't prove anything.

Steve - your capitalization of the word FOR makes the perfect point - its not JUST one part of that at a time. Its intended to be a goverment that does FOR the People in the ways Of the people that they want BY the people that are duly elected. Not just one section. The issue with this mess is that it may be FOR the people - but it is not OF the people since the people didn't support it.

As for nit-picking the wording - as I said in my previous post here - words mean things. Substituting those words for other ones with "similiar" meaning changes the original intent. So for accuracy sake we should be VERY concerned with the meaning of the words. It is not "nit-picking" when one insists that something means what it says, vs it meaning something other than what it says.

[Happy Times]

Providing general welfare includes health care in my book. Then again, I am of the opinion that hospitals should not run for profit, but that the wages of the staff be kept competitive.

That being said, this will probably fail because when you have two parties fighting for power which are nigh on identical in action, but diametrically opposed in rethoric it is hard to get something done.

Im all for equal education and health care for everyone in Finland but im not sure even that could ever work in an multi ethnic and cultured US.

But social welfare i would like to see cut even here, it is starting to be abused by the immigrants and ethnic Finns alike.

As long as most of the users share the same moral values, responsibility for oneself, it works.

[Sailor Steve]

As for nit-picking the wording - as I said in my previous post here - words mean things. Substituting those words for other ones with "similiar" meaning changes the original intent. So for accuracy sake we should be VERY concerned with the meaning of the words. It is not "nit-picking" when one insists that something means what it says, vs it meaning something other than what it says.
The problem is that words mean different things to different people, as shown in the 'religion' discussions. It doesn't say 'separation', but that is exactly what Madison intended when he worded it the way he did.

I prefer to see things like health care handled at the State level, and firmly believe the Federal government should be solely devoted to foreign affairs and refereeing between the states, but if you're going to insist that precise wording is everything, you lose right off the bat. It specifically says "Promote the general WELFARE". Does that mean welfare as we see it today, or does it mean something other than what it actually says?