Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3
"Do Not Allow Yourself to Get Into a Discussion of the Details"
Topic Started: Mar 19 2010, 10:03 AM (942 Views)
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Most transparent EVAH:

Exactly what I was saying.

Quote:
 
"Do Not Allow Yourself to Get Into a Discussion of the Details"

That's the instruction the Democratic Party has given its spokesmen with regard to the health care debate, in particular the CBO's recent report. It's easy to see why: the Democrats' claims about their health care takeover fall apart if you look at it carefully.

Yesterday, the Democrats sent the memo that is reproduced below to their "health and communications staff." It instructs them in the "key points health staff and communications staff should make in the next 48 to 72 hours in the media ahead of Sunday's vote." The memo admits that the Democrats' claims about their government takeover plan are disingenuous and that it is therefore imperative that they not discuss the plan's details. For example:

Quote:
 
Quote from today's CBO letter: "CBO and JCT estimate that enacting both pieces of legislation--[the Senate-passed bill] and the reconciliation proposal--would produce a net reduction in deficits of $138 billion over the 2010-2019 period as a result of changes in direct spending and revenues."

Sure. This results from the childishly simple fraud that the Democrats are using the CBO to perpetrate. The CBO will only estimate costs ten years out. So the Democrats' plan increases taxes right away, but waits four or five years to implement its most expensive provisions. So the Dems are comparing ten years of taxes against five years of spending. What a great way to reduce the deficit! Actually, if you compare revenues against expenditures in any given year after the plan is up and running, the plan hemorrhages money.

So Democrats are warned not to venture into substantive debate with their Republican opponents:

We cannot emphasize enough: do not allow yourself (or your boss) to get into a discussion of the details of the CBO scores and textual narrative. Instead, focus only on the deficit reduction and the number of Americans covered. ... These anti-reform extremists [Ed.: That would be the American people.] are making a last-ditch effort to derail reform. Do not give them ground by debating details.

That explains why Republicans like Paul Ryan, who are always ready to debate details, are feeling so lonely these days.

One of the many dishonest features of the Democrats' effort to conceal the fact that their plan is a budget-buster is the assumption that reimbursements to physicians under Medicare will decline. This accounts for a large chunk of the Democrats' "savings." In fact, all knowledgeable observers understand that this alleged savings will be illusory because Congress will, in separate legislation, raise those reimbursement levels as in the past. The Democrats' memo acknowledges the party's dishonesty on this point, and urges its staffers to continue misleading the public:

Quote:
 
Second, most health staff are already aware that our health proposal does not contain a "doc fix." Some Republicans have repeated CBO's November 18 letter that says "the sustainable growth rate (SGR) mechanism governing Medicare's payments to physicians has frequently been modified ... to avoid reduction in those payments, and legislation to do so again is currently under consideration in the Congress." The inclusion of a full SGR repeal would undermine reform's budget neutrality. So, again, do not allow yourself (or your boss) to get into a discussion of the details of CBO scores and textual narrative. Instead, focus only on the deficit reductions and number of Americans covered.[

As most health staff knows, Leadership and the White House are working with the AMA to rally physicians support for a full SGR repeal later this spring. However, both health and communications staff should understand we do not want that policy discussion discussed at this time, lest it complicate the last critical push to health care reform.


It couldn't be clearer: the Democrats' strategy is to mislead the American people about the nature, contents and fiscal consequences of their health care takeover. Toward that end, they are trying to cover up the details of the plan, at least until Sunday's vote. Here is the Democrats' memo;

Posted Image
Posted Image


In other words, "We'd be happy to talk about this with you and...Oh! Look! A pony!"
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kincaid
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Interesting. Just the other day some leftwing pundit was saying on the radio that if the Dems could just break this whole thing down into parts and move away from the "comprehensiveness" of it all, they'd be able to persaude the American people to support it.

I think the Dems have gone about this all wrong (and perhaps they have to, as going about it right means its certain death). Rather than trying to armtwist members of the house, they should be convincing the American people to support the plan. If support was up, none of these Dems would feel the need to run for cover or hide their vote or just vote no.
Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Let me get this straight......

we're trying to pass a health care plan written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it,

passed by a Congress that hasn't read it but exempts themselves from it,

to be signed by a president that also is exempt from it and hasn't read it and who smokes,

with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes,

all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's broke.

What the hell could possibly go wrong?
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Larry,

See:

Quote:
 
House Minority Leader John Boehner says this weekend’s votes on healthcare reform will haunt Democrats through November’s election and mean “sacrificing a big number of their members” to meet President Barack Obama agenda.

Source: LINK

Surely you can conjure up a bright side for youself where, after Sunday's vote, the GOP will regain control of Congress in November, undo healthcare reform entirely, cut taxes, and get Sarah Palin elected President in 2012, right?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Posted Image
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Did you see the last paragraph?
Quote:
 
It is [also] ideal to use “95 percent” instead of letting the media frame the discussion that 23 million American [would] still [be] uninsured [in 2019]. Some Republicans who are against reform have tried to assert the 23 million is inconsistent with the President’s Sept. 9, 2009 remarks to a joint session of Congress that there are 30 million Americans [today] without health insurance.

Emphasis mine.
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luke's Dad
Member Avatar
Emperor Pengin
Axtremus
Mar 19 2010, 11:31 AM
Larry,

See:

Quote:
 
House Minority Leader John Boehner says this weekend’s votes on healthcare reform will haunt Democrats through November’s election and mean “sacrificing a big number of their members” to meet President Barack Obama agenda.

Source: LINK

Surely you can conjure up a bright side for youself where, after Sunday's vote, the GOP will regain control of Congress in November, undo healthcare reform entirely, cut taxes, and get Sarah Palin elected President in 2012, right?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
Oh, I've already got an even better bright side. I just moved my entire investment portfolio ($213.76) over to publicly traded insurance companies. Then I sent the details of this transaction and a copy of the bill to the CBo and asked for a 9 month projection. Their tally? One Hundred Gajillion Dollars!

The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Democrats say it's a fake.
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Luke's Dad
Mar 19 2010, 12:04 PM
Oh, I've already got an even better bright side. I just moved my entire investment portfolio ($213.76) over to publicly traded insurance companies. Then I sent the details of this transaction and a copy of the bill to the CBo and asked for a 9 month projection. Their tally? One Hundred Gajillion Dollars!

Just so you know, I will likely continue to advocate for single-payer universal healthcare system which will very likely have adverse effects on insurance companies' growth projections, profitabilities, and share holder values. Invest as you see fit.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
George K
Mar 19 2010, 02:04 PM
Democrats say it's a fake.


C'mon, George, the opening post spans one or two screens' worth of space spouting a hoax, at least make the proclamation that it's a hoax more prominently that just a one line tiny little post. Fair? :D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Axtremus
Mar 19 2010, 02:50 PM
George K
Mar 19 2010, 02:04 PM
Democrats say it's a fake.


C'mon, George, the opening post spans one or two screens' worth of space spouting a hoax, at least make the proclamation that it's a hoax more prominently that just a one line tiny little post. Fair? :D
Faked, but accurate.

That worked for you in 2004, didn't it?
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luke's Dad
Member Avatar
Emperor Pengin
Axtremus
Mar 19 2010, 02:46 PM
Luke's Dad
Mar 19 2010, 12:04 PM
Oh, I've already got an even better bright side. I just moved my entire investment portfolio ($213.76) over to publicly traded insurance companies. Then I sent the details of this transaction and a copy of the bill to the CBo and asked for a 9 month projection. Their tally? One Hundred Gajillion Dollars!

Just so you know, I will likely continue to advocate for single-payer universal healthcare system which will very likely have adverse effects on insurance companies' growth projections, profitabilities, and share holder values. Invest as you see fit.
I think I'm safe for the next two years. Obama will veto any attempts at repealing the bill from the Republican Held Congress.
The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Axtremus
Mar 19 2010, 02:50 PM
George K
Mar 19 2010, 02:04 PM
Democrats say it's a fake.


C'mon, George, the opening post spans one or two screens' worth of space spouting a hoax, at least make the proclamation that it's a hoax more prominently that just a one line tiny little post. Fair? :D
Whether it is a fake or not, the Supreme Leader Obama is following that script very carefully. In the interview with Bret Baier, Obama made it clear that he doesn't care about procedure (which is incredibly scary) and assiduously avoided any details about what was in the bill while claiming that we all know what is in the bill.

The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Axtremus
Mar 19 2010, 02:46 PM
Luke's Dad
Mar 19 2010, 12:04 PM
Oh, I've already got an even better bright side. I just moved my entire investment portfolio ($213.76) over to publicly traded insurance companies. Then I sent the details of this transaction and a copy of the bill to the CBo and asked for a 9 month projection. Their tally? One Hundred Gajillion Dollars!

Just so you know, I will likely continue to advocate for single-payer universal healthcare system which will very likely have adverse effects on insurance companies' growth projections, profitabilities, and share holder values. Invest as you see fit.
YEAH!

Those damned insurance companies - how DARE they make a profit! Let's punish them by sending the entire f*cking country into bankruptcy.

THAT'S thinking like a smart man, yes it is.....



Geez.... modern liberalism IS a mental disease..
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Quote:
 
Those damned insurance companies - how DARE they make a profit! Let's punish them by sending the entire f*cking country into bankruptcy.
It's my position that basic essential healthcare should be a not-for-profit business (don't confuse that with not paying the service providers a fair market wage; "profit" is what's left over after you pay the people who do the work and after you pay for all the necessary overhead).

I have no problem with profit-making from non-essential, elective treatments.

Same principle as getting basic security services from the police on a not-for-profit basis (and the police officers get paid a fair market wage; though some would argue that they, along with most public servants, get an out-sized retirement benefits package). If you want more, hire your own private body guards and I have no problem with body guards making profits, as much as the market can bear.

Not everything in America has to make a profit.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Axtremus
Mar 20 2010, 04:18 AM
Quote:
 
Those damned insurance companies - how DARE they make a profit! Let's punish them by sending the entire f*cking country into bankruptcy.
It's my position that basic essential healthcare should be a not-for-profit business (don't confuse that with not paying the service providers a fair market wage; "profit" is what's left over after you pay the people who do the work and after you pay for all the necessary overhead).
Then you should be a big supporter of Catholic hospitals.

But you are confusing the issue between insurance and health care.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Quote:
 
It's my position that basic essential healthcare should be a not-for-profit business (don't confuse that with not paying the service providers a fair market wage; "profit" is what's left over after you pay the people who do the work and after you pay for all the necessary overhead).



Your statement shows the sort of shallow thinking that is typical of liberals. "basic essential health care" is provided by men and women who spend years of hard work, huge sums of money learning for schooling, and then go into the business of providing you with your "basic health care". It is not "big evil corporation/big evil insurance/big evil pharma" who provide us with "basic essential health care", it is men like George, Bach, and tens of thousands like them who do that. Part of the reason they choose to put in the effort it takes to be able to do that is because they want to earn a good living from it. But you seem to be of the opinion that those who provide this "basic essential health care" should consider themselves martyrs for your utopian ideals.

Sorry, but I think they deserve every dime they earn.

Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Beacon Chris
Member Avatar
Junior Carp
Larry,

I think the more essential principle behind for-profit business is that it creates efficiency. The profitability demanded by shareholders ensures accountability from the bottom to the top of a corporation. The problem we have in the United States is a shortage of competition created by government mandates and intervention in the free market. New York is a great example. By the time I pay my premiums and copays, my heath care runs about $2,000 per month. I only have three or four insurance companies to choose from. In a state like Texas, for example, where government is less intrusive I could have the same policy for about $800 and far greater choice.

How you durrin?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
ivorythumper
Mar 20 2010, 09:00 AM
Axtremus
Mar 20 2010, 04:18 AM
Quote:
 
Those damned insurance companies - how DARE they make a profit! Let's punish them by sending the entire f*cking country into bankruptcy.
It's my position that basic essential healthcare should be a not-for-profit business (don't confuse that with not paying the service providers a fair market wage; "profit" is what's left over after you pay the people who do the work and after you pay for all the necessary overhead).
Then you should be a big supporter of Catholic hospitals.

But you are confusing the issue between insurance and health care.
Not at all. I do mean "healthcare" when I write "healthcare," and I do mean "healthcare insurance" when I write "healthcare insurance."

I am for non-profit hospitals, I apprecite the non-profit aspects of Catholic hospitals, but think they are fundamentally misguided by not providing artificial contraceptive and abortion services.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Beacon Chris
Member Avatar
Junior Carp
Axtremus
Mar 20 2010, 04:18 AM
Quote:
 
Those damned insurance companies - how DARE they make a profit! Let's punish them by sending the entire f*cking country into bankruptcy.
It's my position that basic essential healthcare should be a not-for-profit business (don't confuse that with not paying the service providers a fair market wage; "profit" is what's left over after you pay the people who do the work and after you pay for all the necessary overhead).

I have no problem with profit-making from non-essential, elective treatments.

Same principle as getting basic security services from the police on a not-for-profit basis (and the police officers get paid a fair market wage; though some would argue that they, along with most public servants, get an out-sized retirement benefits package). If you want more, hire your own private body guards and I have no problem with body guards making profits, as much as the market can bear.

Not everything in America has to make a profit.
Hey,

I wonder if the new "TSA" is operating with less or more expense than the previous private contractors who handled airport security....

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/04/11/airport-security.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/29/AR2005062903063.html

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/the-high-cost-of-airport-security.aspx

I'm not saying I have the answer, but it looks like we have ever more anecdotal evidence of needless government waste.
How you durrin?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Axtremus
Mar 20 2010, 09:40 AM
Not at all. I do mean "healthcare" when I write "healthcare," and I do mean "healthcare insurance" when I write "healthcare insurance."
So you have no problem with healthcare insurance companies making a profit? Or should companies be made to assume risk without the reward of true profit? If so, would that be limited to healthcare insurance, or should auto, home, life and professional liability insurance companies also have to assume risk without the reward of true profit?
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Horace
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Beacon Chris
Mar 20 2010, 09:32 AM
Larry,

I think the more essential principle behind for-profit business is that it creates efficiency.
Sure, you just have to start to consider exactly what process they're trying to make efficient. Free markets work best for non-essential goods that people can take or leave, and if they take them, they pay for them 100% out of their own pocket.

Health care/insurance breaks that model in about 5 different places, it's a different animal.
As a good person, I implore you to do as I, a good person, do. Be good. Do NOT be bad. If you see bad, end bad. End it in yourself, and end it in others. By any means necessary, the good must conquer the bad. Good people know this. Do you know this? Are you good?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Horace
Mar 20 2010, 09:50 AM
Beacon Chris
Mar 20 2010, 09:32 AM
Larry,

I think the more essential principle behind for-profit business is that it creates efficiency.
Sure, you just have to start to consider exactly what process they're trying to make efficient. Free markets work best for non-essential goods that people can take or leave, and if they take them, they pay for them 100% out of their own pocket.

Health care/insurance breaks that model in about 5 different places, it's a different animal.
+1
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Horace
Mar 20 2010, 09:50 AM
Beacon Chris
Mar 20 2010, 09:32 AM
Larry,

I think the more essential principle behind for-profit business is that it creates efficiency.
Sure, you just have to start to consider exactly what process they're trying to make efficient. Free markets work best for non-essential goods that people can take or leave, and if they take them, they pay for them 100% out of their own pocket.

Health care/insurance breaks that model in about 5 different places, it's a different animal.
Food and housing are much more essential than health care. How does that map on to your thinking about non essential vs essential goods?
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Horace
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
ivorythumper
Mar 20 2010, 09:50 AM
Axtremus
Mar 20 2010, 09:40 AM
Not at all. I do mean "healthcare" when I write "healthcare," and I do mean "healthcare insurance" when I write "healthcare insurance."
So you have no problem with healthcare insurance companies making a profit? Or should companies be made to assume risk without the reward of true profit? If so, would that be limited to healthcare insurance, or should auto, home, life and professional liability insurance companies also have to assume risk without the reward of true profit?
The difference as I see it betweeen auto and health insurance is that health is a "priceless" concept in our view, irreplaceable and non-monetizable. So we've monetized the price of health via insurance by simply taking a huge number, the worst-case scenario cost of individual health care, and averaging it out over the entire population. Problem being, the celing there does not exist on the "worst case scenario".

There is always a ceiling for home or auto insurance - the cost of replacement.
As a good person, I implore you to do as I, a good person, do. Be good. Do NOT be bad. If you see bad, end bad. End it in yourself, and end it in others. By any means necessary, the good must conquer the bad. Good people know this. Do you know this? Are you good?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3