Watch the Movie Sicko and then tell me Hillary

[samplegirl]

is your girl.

[Selatius]

1. What, you oppose being forced to buy for-profit health insurance?

What have you got against capitalism? They're simply trying to turn a profit by denying care or giving the least amount of help that's possible given the contract you signed. The shareholders want bigger dividends all the time. I'm sure you can understand that. :sarcasm:

[Captain Hilts]

2. Making everyone buy insurance is the only way to make it affordable for all -

Yes, I have issues with dealing with private insurers.

But making it elective doesn't work because only people who think they're going to be ill will buy it. People under 30 do not buy health insurance, and having them involved in the process is what makes it affordable to people who need it and themselves when their day comes.

It's spreading the risky populations as is done with car insurance.

[Th1onein]

3. Gosh, don't you think that instead of piling ANOTHER bill

on top of all of the others, it might be the smart thing to do, to get our MONEY'S WORTH out of all of the taxes we are paying? Like, maybe, instead of waging wars costing us billions, and lining the pockets of corporations, we could take care of OUR people here, for once, with OUR money? I mean, we are the people paying these taxes, right? Not the corporations.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

4. no, no, and no, oh, and NO!

your average insurer is making between 6-17% return on your premium dollar, and if their investments suck, they take more out of the incoming.
they have hundreds of thousands of people who rate, underwrite, sell, profit from, adjust, and deny every single step of a policy, a claim and a doctor who dares recommend and order more tests.

this is smart? hardly.

THIS IS STUPID.

insurance companies are, despite their really cool ads, and their pretty music and smiling faces on TeeVee, greedy bastards that will sell their own mothers short to increase profits. I deal with them every day. To put the slightest bit of trust in their hands is not just foolish, it is self-destructive.

[samplegirl]

19. All started by Richard Nixon

[Donnachaidh]

13. Baloney!

The insurance companies will NOT spread the cost equally amongst all. If anything they'll find newer, meaner ways to hike the cost of the chronically ill, and they'll do it with gusto -- because WE will be forced into paying for it. Ask anyone who has tried to deal with the COBRA plan.

Jeez -- do the freaking math! You honestly think for-profit companies will do anything more than rake in MORE profit with mandatory insurance? I got a bridge AND some prime real estate I'll let you have for cheap if you think this SCAM is going to work...:sarcasm: :eyes:

[Captain Hilts]

25. Cool off, I didn't say that I liked the idea of private insurance companies doing it, but

unless ANY program is mandatory, there will be no fair healthcare. None.

Optional healthcare will permit the healthy and the wealthy to bail on it.

[RaleighNCDUer]

30. So, obviously, the answer is single-payer healthcare, paid by

taxes. Like Medicare. Everybody pays in. Nobody opts out. The rich can buy supplemental insurance if they want to, to get their private rooms and gourmet meals, while the rest of us get what every other major industrialized nation in the world gets - universal healthcare.

[Captain Hilts]

34. Yep. That's the ideal. nt

[jwirr]

22. I think that if you asked most seniors if the wanted more Plan D you

would find out why privatizing health care is a bad idea. One of the things I hate about it the most is the forest of trees they cut down to send you all kinds of propaganda (instructions, rules, etc.) that most of us do not read and cannot understand even when we read it. They also still use a great deal of advertisements to get you to change from one program to another - again with very confusing rhetoric. Plus since when will a for profit organization do a better job than a non-profit one?

[AdHocSolver]

29. Wrong! Eliminating the waste, fraud, and abuse will provide affordable health care for all.

First, most of the people who don't buy health insurance, don't buy it because they can't afford it.

Second, just forcing people to buy health insurance won't eliminate the waste, fraud, and abuse. It will just add to the insurance company profits. They will find ways to deny claims, or refuse to pay for an entire bill, forcing the patients to pay for treatment anyway.

Without addressing the waste, fraud, and abuse up front, Clinton's plan is as sensible as a plan to save oil by giving tax rebates to people who buy Hummers.

[cyclezealot]

33. forcing us to buy a plan that does not guarantee

coverage is no plan. No thank you. I'd likely choose to pay a federal fine over buy into an expensive plan that results in certain cancelation of various coverages. Particularily when you are over 50 and a medical plan is as expensive as the mortgage.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

39. Did you see Sicko? The film wasn't really about the uninsured but the Insured.

The Insurance companies are worried about their bottom line and not that you are getting the health care you need. So by making it for profit, the health insurance companies can continue with the same pattern. A pattern that was started when Nixon was President and was discussed in the Nixon tapes.

[stranger81]

49. I take it you've never been unable to afford health insurance

My mother died of a treatable illness once she and my father lost their health insurance (Dad got laid off), and trust me . . . . . it wasn't as if they were not buying health insurance because they preferred to take their chances.

What do you propose to do with the millions and millions of Americans that simply cannot afford health insurance? Would you criminalize my widowed father for being unable to afford health insurance? Bring back debtors prisons? What?

Your post shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the health care crisis in this country.

[glowing]

52. People don't buy health insurance because they can't affford it

and when I was in that position, I could not afford it and pay the rent, car payment, and car insurance.... sorry, that line doesn't work... People under 30 don't buy it because they can't, not because they think they are super-human... That statement right there puts you in a class of people that I generally stay away from.. I think I will continue...

[rateyes]

54. You need to study the issue a little bit more, Mookie....

that is about the WORST idea for universal healthcare there is. Single-payer is the only way universal care will happen.

Hillary is for universal INSURANCE...which does NOT mean universal CARE...and, she wants to force everyone to buy the INSURANCE...most of which will suck gravy...high deductibles and co-pays, and a lot more "uninsured" conditions, etc...for those who can least afford it.

[Breeze54]

7. Right on!

My sister was talking about the 'for profit' mentality and the fact it's NEVER mentioned by the candidates, well, not all.
She absolutely hates Edwards plan and HRC's (imagine that) and when I mentioned Kucinich's plan; she AGREED with me!! :P

Last I had heard she was cheering for HRC but... not any more. ;)

[Captain Hilts]

12. I've lived most my life on US military or Canadian single payer...

You have to have a mandatory system that's the same for everyone. That way, high and low risk populations all pay into the same pot. But it has to be mandatory.

I'm not keen on it being with private insurance, but if that's the half loaf we have to take to get some kind of national healthcare, I'll take it. I'm unemployed and no one will ensure me for that one reason, so I would like to get health insurance any way I can.

[Breeze54]

14. We are being forced into it here and it doesn't cover everything!

The rich get the better health care STILL!!

It is very expensive!! :grr:

[dysfunctional press]

47. you've been refused private health insurance ONLY because you are unemployed?

i refuse to believe that an insurance company would refuse to insure somebody who could pay their premiums simply because they were "unemployed". and IF that really is the case, what if, instead of saying UN-employed, you told them that you were SELF-employed?

[zalinda]

17. Edwards' plan and Clinton's are not the same

Edwards plan pits the private insurance companies against the government insurance plan. This is the only way we can get to a single payer plan. Well, single payer for most people. I'm sure there are rich people who will opt to have a private plan, so they can have the luxury perks. Meanwhile, Edwards plan will not exclude anyone for any reason. It will also cover mental health, and let the doctor have the last word on medical treatment. Elizabeth also said it will cover some alternative health care.

While Kucinich's plan sounds great, it can't happen overnight. There has to be a progression to get there, and Edwards' plan does that.

zalinda

[AdHocSolver]

23. I agree. Set up an alternative insurance plan to compete with for-profit insurance.

This is the way to get to universal health insurance. Give the for-profit insurance companies what they don't have now, i.e. competition. Break the monopoly power currently held by for-profit insurance companies, and a majority of the people will choose a single payer system. A single payer system will cover more situations for more people, and at the same time, will cost far less than the for-profit insurance morass that we have forced on us now.

The lowered administrative costs due to eliminating dupication of effort for providing insurance coverage, and the administrative cost savings to hospitals and doctors by having a standardized billing system, will save billions of dollars.

Edward's plan is the only plan that recognizes what is necessary to work towards, and eventually achieve, universal health care coverage.

[Breeze54]

24. They both suck and that

was the point.

[RaleighNCDUer]

31. "There has to be a progression..."

Why?

[zalinda]

35. Because this is a huge country

with a huge industry in health care, it would cause chaos if it made a sharp left turn into single payer health insurance. And besides, do you honestly think that the insurance industry or the repubs will let this happen without a fight? The Harry and Louise commercials was a hint at what will happen. This time though the industry will go for the jugular. It will scare the hell out of people with "socialized" medicine. It will bring out every horror story that it can dig up from every country with "socialized" medicine. These commercials will run day after day, scaring the hell out of people, even those without insurance. Our reps in DC will hear an ear full and the Kucinich plan will not be passed.

On the other hand if we put the insurance industry in competition with the government plan, yeah there would still be commercials, but they won't be quite so bad. They will figure that the government will get all the sick people, people they don't want to cover anyway. They will start to emphasize that their plans are more for the "smart", ie wealthy people. It will be just like advertising for cars, why drive a Chevy when you can drive a Cadillac, and some people will go for it.

You start by putting all the pieces in place, then turn Medicaid into the new health system, then Medicare, then start adding the uninsured. You try to minimize the confusion into a new system. Fewer people lose their jobs in the health industry, like the people who do nothing but the insurance paper work in doctor's offices or hospitals and the like. You wouldn't have people so overwhelmed by the new system that people get lost in the shuffle. The logistics of implementing a new system can be overwhelming and confusing, but if you do it in increments, then fewer mistakes will be made and fewer people will suffer.

zalinda

[Vinca]

41. You have no idea how my heart bleeds for the poor insurance industry.

I mean gosh, my premiums only went up 200% in 3 years and the deductible increased to a mere $5,000. But, even though I cannot afford insurance anymore, I don't want the insurance CEOs to suffer. Heaven forbid they have to decrease the length of the yacht or give up one of their homes. It's inhumane. Sorry, zalinda - I say cut these people off at the knees and go straight to single payer, universal care. Now I'm off to gobble more Aleve since I can't afford to have my torn leg muscle repaired.

[zalinda]

42. Yeah, the CEO's can rot in hell

but there are a lot of little people who work for the insurance industry who are barely putting food on the table. Do you all of a sudden pull the rug out from under them? And what about all the women (and yes, the vast majority are women) who do all the insurance paperwork for the doctor's offices, hospitals, labs, physical therapy, etc? So, we put them all out of work?

For the reasons I stated above, a Kucinich plan won't ever get passed, even if by some miracle Kucinich gets elected.

And, btw, I don't have health insurance, and for the record, I have fibromyalgia, arthritic knees and hips that need to be replaced and a bunch of other "little" things that happen when you get old. And I want something that could actually happen, rather than a "pie in the sky" type of approach.

zalinda

[Vinca]

43. If the government administers payment of health claims, all of a sudden

there will be many, many federal jobs open to the displaced insurance processors. In any case, no one really cared when the book binders were put out of work, or the shoe makers, or the people who sewed clothing, or the linen workers, or the shrimpers or thousands of other occupations that have been victims of our wonderful trade agreements. My charity won't begin with the insurance workers when many of them are paid to deny care. I understand your point and you're probably correct. We'll get to single payer someday, but it will be a long, slow, creep of a process. It doesn't have to be, but there are no JFK's anymore to vow to "go to the moon" and we do it.

[zalinda]

46. Actually, I don't think it will take long

Remember the health industry will want to get rid of all those who are a burden on the bottom line. And if you're spouse or children are on a government health plan, would you stay on a private one? I think it will take some years, but the majority could probably be covered within a President's tenure.

Yes, there were jobs that were taken, but they were also filled by people who knew the job. We would have a situation with hundreds, if not thousands of employees not knowing how to do the job. A bank once told me it takes 3 months for an employee to learn a job properly. Would you want a family member to be without medical insurance or maybe medical care for 3 months, I wouldn't. A transition into single payer is the only logical way to go. It would cause less confusion, less trauma, less wait time and the most progress of any plan.

Again, I don't see any health industry company lying down without a fight. We know they have the money to buy the air time, and big pharma will help them with their fight. If you think there are a lot of drug ads, just wait until the industry starts fighting against single payer health insurance.

zalinda

[Harper_is_Bush]

5. nice argument you're making there.

not.

[proud2BlibKansan]

45. Have you seen SICKO?

[UTUSN]

6. O.K., fine. Therefore, let us have another Rethug. Let's GO for it, samplegirl!1 n/t

[Warpy]

8. I've already said I'm completely disgusted by her health care

plan, one that offers security to the insurance industry but only the illusion of health care coverage to we the people.

However, one can hope she'll listen to reason once she's in office. Her voting record is such that I will vote for her if she's the nominee.

I'm also planning to leave the country. 20 years being declared an uninsurable nonperson are enough.

[Mutineer]

9. She ain't my girl

and she never will be.

[rAVES]

10. why do you hate women Samplegirl?

[UTUSN]

11. HaHAH!1 That's what *I* want to know!1 n/t

[samplegirl]

20. Hillary has always been a sell out

shes a Builderberger. If you really think your going to get all you need from a Hillary Health Plan...your dead wrong.

[MethuenProgressive]

15. NH poll: "Best Able to Handle Health Care" Clinton 53%, Edwards 15%, Obama 13%

Best Able to Handle Health Care
Clinton Edwards Obama Richardson
--53%-----15%----13%---5%
--------------------------------
Looks like NH voters base their opinions on more than just a movie.

[fenriswolf]

26. right like name recogniton

[madrchsod]

27. best able to handle health care?

are they going to get my insurance company to pay my hospital bill? oh they have`t denied my claim, they just won`t pay the hospital . this is the insurance companies new deal..delay the payments for months.

[madrchsod]

28. dennis`s plan-universal health care for all.

it could be funded by various taxations and direct payments

i still could not reasonable insurance cost and coverage because of my age and medical condition under any of these so called reforms

[RaleighNCDUer]

32. Where's Dennis? nt

[mmonk]

44. Yep, popularity, name recognition, Bill Clinton dreaming, and hero worship

as well as their ignorance.

[leftchick]

48. people are stupid

They read a headline " Hillary's Health Care Plan" and they do not bother with the details. Like the $$$$$ Big Pharma and the Insurance companiess will make. They should, they helped write her 'Insurance For All Plan'. :eyes:

[warren pease]

50. Like ignorance..

If you wanted to design a new health care delivery system for this country, what sensible person would start by inviting the participation of the single most destructive element in the current one? Get these goddamned parasites out of the health care business and let them make money doing honest work -- like cleaning train station bathrooms with their forked tongues.

In my opinion, to get to single-payer, we need to separate the idea of health care from the idea of health insurance.

Health care is what happens when patients and health care professionals interact to, in the best case, successfully diagnose and treat a medical condition or injury.

Health insurance is the protection money you have to pay the middle man to enable this transaction and keep you out of bankruptcy court. Why would anyone want to give some predatory intermediary who does absolutely nothing to provide health care a single damn penny?

The relationship of health care to insurance is manufactured out of thin air by the US obsession with applying market-based, privatized solutions to nationalized social problems.

To create a rational system that doesn't require us to bet against our own mortality, that linkage must disappear in favor of a system that treats health care as a basic human right rather than a privilege to be auctioned off to the highest bidder.

See Kucinich's plan for details.

He's the only candidate advocating single-payer, universal-access; Hillary and the rest are all doing the corporate suck-up dance, dressing up the same tired, deadly system in a bunch of new happy talk that attempts to mask their primary objective: ensuring the continued profitability of the health insurance scam.

Shameless bastards that they are, they need to be called on their bullshit and exposed as liars and slaves to the status quo, a condition so dear to the hearts of their campaign "contributors" that they're willing to spend millions to preserve it.


wp

[HughBeaumont]

16. Watched it. Only reinforced my previous belief that she's not "our girl".

Like another poster said - I want the best democratic candidate FOR AMERICA. Not for the Democratic party. It's not up to me to accommodate to whoever the party places on it's platter. That smacks of a party that's about capitulation over change, and if things go wrong; well, "you didn't support her enough"? WRONG.

[AdHocSolver]

18. Clinton's plan is one that favors the insurance industry the most.

From what I have read about all of the various plans, Clinton's plan says nothing about addressing the lack of protection for the people insured by her plan. For any insurance plan to work, the rules governing its implementation have to be spelled out in detail. The problem with so-called "private" health insurance is that the companies can run it any way that suits them to maximize their profits, and there is no recourse to the insured parties to get any justice.

For any universal health care plan to work, everyone must be entitled to some minimum level of coverage. Everyone must have to pay some level of premium to spread the risk. Those in the lower income levels should be subsidized. Corporations should be required to pay some premiums for their employees since they benefit when their employees are able to maintain their health, on the one hand, and many people get sick from their work environment. (This would also provide an incentive for employers to keep a healthier work environment.)

There also has to be rules set up to keep hospitals and the medical establishment from ripping off the system. Currently, the insurance companies merely refuse to pay a bill if some hospital charges an excessive amount for treatment. Systems have to be implemented to prevent hospitals and doctors from milking the system. It is rampant. Hospitals building new facilities next to an existing hospital just to steal patients from that hospital, when there is no need for more beds. Doctors schduling tests just to get payment for underused expensive diagnostic equipment. I have seen this happen extensively over the years, especially as a former hospital employee.

Nothing needs to be mentioned about drug company abuse of the system.

Corporations often merge to achieve cost savings by eliminating employees through merging computer departments, advertising, personnel functions and so on. By setting up an insurance system model based on Medicare, billions of dollars would be saved from the current insurance setup. By standardizing on insurance rules and forms, hospitals and doctors would save billions more in administrative costs. This savings alone would pay for the health care of millions not now insured.

One more issue with our current medical system has to be addressed. One reason it is so difficult to get any movement on health care reform is that the hospitals, insurance companies, HMO's and drug companies are all controlled by the same financial institutions. All three are controlled by the same people. They are not in conflict with each other, they work together to rip us off.

[samplegirl]

21. Your right

and if shes your girl...HMO's will continue to dictate whats is covered.

[Perry Logan]

36. Shouldn't this thread be in the "OP's that are non sequiturs" section?

[MonkeyFunk]

37. As you wish.

I've seen the movie "Sicko" and Hillary is my girl.

[B Calm]

38. It bothers me where she's getting all her campaign cash. Payback

a bitch, and as always it will be at the working class expense.

[cali]

51. why do I have the feeling you don't know where she gets her

funding? The vast majority of it, some 88%, comes from individual donors. She's not my candidate, but facts matter.

[retread]

40. Ignore everything but the national polls. n/t

[Rex]

53. Yeah she sold out. So what are you going to do if she wins the primaries?

Vote for a Repuke? I don't like her, not after seeing that. But what can I do? What can anyone do?

I'll sit back and wait for an answer.

Oh, and voting for a Puker or NOT voting are not acceptable answers. Just to save time.