To My Republican Friends......What Needs to Be Done to Win National Elections

[Vox]

I notice you posted no facts to the contrary. Who do you think pays for the emergency room visit by the un or underinsured?

Charity? And how do you expect Obamacare to remedy the situation described in your article? Obamacare ITSELF is driving up healthcare costs for uninsured and under insured. It is having the direct opposite effect on healthcare costs in America, let alone California.

Are you seriously proposing charity as a response to access to quality healthcare?

I can't believe this still has to be explained to you. Instead of paying $300 for treatment in an emergency room because the individual has no insurance, we are paying $100 for treatment in a doctors office because they are insured. See the savings already? By subsidizing the uninsured so they can purchase insurance, you are lowering the cost for everyone.

Another example of how this lower costs...individual does not have insurance so they don't make regular doctor visits...which means they ignore the signs of diabetes until it is too late because they are now being treated in the emergency room, where the only option is costly surgery removing the limb and requiring extensive rehabilitation. Which treatment do you think costs less?

The Affordable Care Act has had an effect on the cost of healthcare costs..it's been slowing them down.

The health-care law’s success story: Slowing down medical costs

stop repeating bullshit.

Nobody is paying 300$ in the ER for the problem which will cost 75-100 in the walk-in clinic.

Hospitals charge you cash before even registering and the charge is twice as much as the walk-in clinic in the vicinity - so if you have a minor problem, like the above mentioned sore throat - you have to be an idiot to pay twice as much as you can pay across the street without any wait.

That is one of the myths and/or lies - dispensed between the gullible leftards that poor people without insurance treat strep throats in the ER.

They do not.

Poor people without insurance know perfectly well that 75 is twice less than 150

 

[Vox]

Post facts contrary to:

It costs $91, for example, to treat a patient with strep throat in a doctor's office. Treating that same patient in the emergency room costs more than three times as much - $321.

Where do the uninsured get treatment? Not in a doctors office...they wait in emergency rooms and get the $321 treatment instead of the $91 treatment. That drives all our costs up.

Would you rather pay $321 for that individual's care or $91? By subsidizing the individual's purchase of insurance through the exchanges, we are paying the $91 instead of the $321.

The best, most efficient and cost effective way to deliver health care to all Americans would be to simply lower the age of Medicare to zero and cover everyone with basic healthcare that includes a drug plan (after we allow Medicare to negotiate the price of drugs like other countries do). Insurance companies could still exist to sell Cadillac supplement plans to those that can afford more comprehensive coverage.

Oh well...instead we have the ACA...proposed by the conservative Heritage Foundation, introduced as Legislation by Republican Presidential nominee Bob Dole, implemented in Massachusetts by Republican Governor and Presidential nominee Mitt Romney (who once touted parts of 'Romneycare' as a national model) and signed into law by moderate Democrat Barack Obama.

and people have the nerve to call it "Socialist Healthcare"...

total bullshit.
first of all you will not even get registered in the ER if you do not pay straightforward 150-200 in the ER -cash or credit card
a visit to walk in clinic is going to cost 75-100 at the maximum and there are more of those type of clinics now than the gas stations - it is a striving business

NOBODY goes to the ER for the strep throat. NOBODY.
Unless it is a complicated one and then ER is the right place to go

Seriously...just do a little bit of fucking research...

The main reason that so many emergency room visits are for non-urgent care is that hospital EDs are required by federal law to provide care to all patients, regardless of their ability to pay. Since they cannot be turned away, patients without health insurance, or the necessary funds to pay out-of-pocket costs, often utilize emergency rooms as their main health care provider. This puts ERs under tremendous strain, and limits their ability to more quickly attend to health emergencies.

Emergency Rooms vs. Urgent Care: Differences in Services and Costs

seriously.
stop eating bullshit from the bullshit propaganda sources. I know perfectly well what EMTALA is but it does not forbid hospital to charge patients in the ER during registration at least 150$ GSW obviously, just roll in -but they are the priority

p.s. every ER room does so called triage - if you are stupid enough to come with a strep throat to the ER you might sit in the waiting room 12 hours before being seen - because you are not a priority.

 

[Seawytch]

If anyone disagrees with me, provide the Constitutional language that authorizes the Federal Courts to invalidate any law that has been passed by Congress, and signed into Law by the President.

Uh...Article III...

SECTION 1.

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.

SECTION 2.

The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.[...]​

 

[Vox]

from your own link:

Paying For Urgent Care Visits

Care at urgent care centers is paid for on a fee-for-service basis. They usually accept most private health insurance plans, with co-pays averaging between $25-$50. A self-paying individual will usually be asked to make a down payment for the visit, with other charges billed at a later date. Cash discounts are often offered for the uninsured.

did you at least read your OWN LINK?

It states exactly what I have said above - walk-in clinic or urgent care center - costs much less and people go THERE to treat relatively minor problems.

 

[Seawytch]

Charity? And how do you expect Obamacare to remedy the situation described in your article? Obamacare ITSELF is driving up healthcare costs for uninsured and under insured. It is having the direct opposite effect on healthcare costs in America, let alone California.

Are you seriously proposing charity as a response to access to quality healthcare?

I can't believe this still has to be explained to you. Instead of paying $300 for treatment in an emergency room because the individual has no insurance, we are paying $100 for treatment in a doctors office because they are insured. See the savings already? By subsidizing the uninsured so they can purchase insurance, you are lowering the cost for everyone.

Another example of how this lower costs...individual does not have insurance so they don't make regular doctor visits...which means they ignore the signs of diabetes until it is too late because they are now being treated in the emergency room, where the only option is costly surgery removing the limb and requiring extensive rehabilitation. Which treatment do you think costs less?

The Affordable Care Act has had an effect on the cost of healthcare costs..it's been slowing them down.

The health-care law’s success story: Slowing down medical costs

stop repeating bullshit.

Nobody is paying 300$ in the ER for the problem which will cost 75-100 in the walk-in clinic.

Hospitals charge you cash before even registering and the charge is twice as much as the walk-in clinic in the vicinity - so if you have a minor problem, like the above mentioned sore throat - you have to be an idiot to pay twice as much as you can pay across the street without any wait.

That is one of the myths and/or lies - dispensed between the gullible leftards that poor people without insurance treat strep throats in the ER.

They do not.

Poor people without insurance know perfectly well that 75 is twice less than 150

You ignore facts...why?

Frequent ER Visits Strain Hospitals, Cost Taxpayers

How Do Taxpayers Pay for the Uninsured?

About the Uninsured

 

[Seawytch]

from your own link:

Paying For Urgent Care Visits

Care at urgent care centers is paid for on a fee-for-service basis. They usually accept most private health insurance plans, with co-pays averaging between $25-$50. A self-paying individual will usually be asked to make a down payment for the visit, with other charges billed at a later date. Cash discounts are often offered for the uninsured.

did you at least read your OWN LINK?

It states exactly what I have said above - walk-in clinic or urgent care center - costs much less and people go THERE to treat relatively minor problems.

Some people go there...that does not change the number of people going to emergency rooms for non urgent care.

Again, why do you think you (your insurance, actually) pay $15 dollars for a $2 box of tissues during a stay in the hospital?

 

[Vox]

Are you seriously proposing charity as a response to access to quality healthcare?

I can't believe this still has to be explained to you. Instead of paying $300 for treatment in an emergency room because the individual has no insurance, we are paying $100 for treatment in a doctors office because they are insured. See the savings already? By subsidizing the uninsured so they can purchase insurance, you are lowering the cost for everyone.

Another example of how this lower costs...individual does not have insurance so they don't make regular doctor visits...which means they ignore the signs of diabetes until it is too late because they are now being treated in the emergency room, where the only option is costly surgery removing the limb and requiring extensive rehabilitation. Which treatment do you think costs less?

The Affordable Care Act has had an effect on the cost of healthcare costs..it's been slowing them down.

The health-care law’s success story: Slowing down medical costs

stop repeating bullshit.

Nobody is paying 300$ in the ER for the problem which will cost 75-100 in the walk-in clinic.

Hospitals charge you cash before even registering and the charge is twice as much as the walk-in clinic in the vicinity - so if you have a minor problem, like the above mentioned sore throat - you have to be an idiot to pay twice as much as you can pay across the street without any wait.

That is one of the myths and/or lies - dispensed between the gullible leftards that poor people without insurance treat strep throats in the ER.

They do not.

Poor people without insurance know perfectly well that 75 is twice less than 150

You ignore facts...why?

Frequent ER Visits Strain Hospitals, Cost Taxpayers

How Do Taxpayers Pay for the Uninsured?

About the Uninsured

those are NOT facts which prove your stupid example with a strep throat.

There are millions of visits to the ER and they need to be treated by the ER.
There are people without any insurance treated in the ER.
There are much more people treated in the ER in MA after their universal healthcare was implemented.

Does not mean that hospital do not find how to make money on those visits.
And you have to be incredibly stupid and uninformed to go to the ER for a strep throat - it will cost you twice as much as in the walk-in or urgent care clinic and you will have to wait until everybody more emergent than you gets seen - can be up to 12 hours.

That what I was mocking at - the stupid example you provided.

BTW, hospitals actually make money only in 2 departments - OR and ER.

Yep. contrary to the whining.

 

[kaz]

What the right is doing is taking advantage of the government to force upon people their belief of what marriage is, while at the same time preaching small government.

And you oppose using government to force beliefs on people, do you? I mean that is a criticism I have of Republicans for things like the war on drugs, abortion and that sort of thing. But damn, for a liberal supporter of an authoritarian party to say it. Wow.



While I say that, I don't do that.

I have stated many times on this board that I have never been a Democrat, and never voted for a Democrat. In 2008 I supported Ron Paul, until the Republican party fought to marginalize his campaign. In 2012 I supported Gary Johnson, until the Republican party fought to keep him off the ballot in my state. But keep making assumptions about my political party, wannabe libertarian.

First, I didn't mean anything by it, I just always see you arguing on the side of the liberals. If you say you're not, I'll assume that until proven otherwise.

Second, your objection is a bit too strong considering how as a regular poster you have to have seen how many obvious liberals claim to not be Democrats. If you were more secure in your view, you would be able to state what you did with that realization rather than having a cow about it. Maybe you need to work on your security a bit.

 

[Vox]

from your own link:

Paying For Urgent Care Visits

Care at urgent care centers is paid for on a fee-for-service basis. They usually accept most private health insurance plans, with co-pays averaging between $25-$50. A self-paying individual will usually be asked to make a down payment for the visit, with other charges billed at a later date. Cash discounts are often offered for the uninsured.

did you at least read your OWN LINK?

It states exactly what I have said above - walk-in clinic or urgent care center - costs much less and people go THERE to treat relatively minor problems.

Some people go there...that does not change the number of people going to emergency rooms for non urgent care.

Again, why do you think you (your insurance, actually) pay $15 dollars for a $2 box of tissues during a stay in the hospital?

yes, it does change a lot.

people coming to the ER are being charged upfront at least 150$ - and if your reason for coming is really not that emergent - you are much better off going to those urgent care/walk-in clinics, otherwise you are not only paying twice as much, you wait five times as much.

Why the hospital is charging as much as it does is a totally different item of discussion.

I simply object to your example, because it is not the main reason people go to the ER. If they do - they usually really need to, not because of the lack of insurance, but because the medical necessity and severity.


And obamacare is not going to solve it - because it is much cheaper to pay for a sore throat visit in an urgent care clinic 75-100 than to pay a premium, deductible and a co-pay afterwards.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Government has no Constitutional obligation to "help" anyone. You are given a Bill of Rights and the opportunity to succeed. That is all you are entitled to.

Nonsense.

The Necessary and Proper Clause affords Congress the authority to address all manner of issues determined appropriate to benefit the Nation as a whole:

Scope of Incidental Powers

That this clause is an enlargement, not a constriction, of the powers expressly granted to Congress, that it enables the lawmakers to select any means reasonably adapted to effectuate those[p.340]powers, was established by Marshall’s classic opinion in McCulloch v. Maryland.1642 “Let the end be legitimate,” he wrote, “let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consistent with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, are constitutional.”1643 Moreover, the provision gives Congress a share in the responsibilities lodged in other departments, by virtue of its right to enact legislation necessary to carry into execution all powers vested in the National Government. Conversely, where necessary for the efficient execution of its own powers, Congress may delegate some measure of legislative power to other departments.1644

Operation of Coefficient Clause

Practically every power of the National Government has been expanded in some degree by the coefficient clause. Under its authority Congress has adopted measures requisite to discharge the treaty obligations of the nation;1645 it has organized the federal judicial system and has enacted a large body of law defining and punishing crimes. Effective control of the national economy has been made possible by the authority to regulate the internal commerce of a State to the extent necessary to protect and promote interstate commerce.1646 The right of Congress to utilize all known and appropriate means for collecting the revenue, including the distraint of property for federal taxes,1647 and its power to acquire property needed for the operation of the Government by the exercise of the power of eminent domain,1648 have greatly extended the range of national power. But the widest application of the necessary and proper clause has occurred in the field of monetary and fiscal controls. Inasmuch as the various specific powers granted by Article I, Sec. 8, do not add up to a general legislative power over such matters, the Court has relied heavily upon this clause in sustaining[p.341]the comprehensive control which Congress has asserted over this subject.1649

CRS/LII Annotated Constitution Article I

Although inalienable, our civil liberties are not absolute, and the Bill of Rights and its case law create the framework in which the courts determine when a given restriction is appropriate or when it is offensive to the Constitution and invalidated.

This is such utter garbage it is barely worthy of a response. And of course, you don't provide the actual Constitutional Language...(you can't let the rubes know what their actual rights are). I will provide the exact language. Folks can read and interpret for themselves. Maybe you can show them exactly where it says they are entitled to a bunch of free shit.

The Congress shall have Power ... To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

And this is an example of how you and others on the right must accept the Constitution and its case law; as the Founding Document exists only in the context of that case law.

You are of course entitled to disagree with the case law; but you must also acknowledge the fact this is what the Constitution means as determined by the Supreme Court, and to refer to it as ‘utter garbage’ succeeds in only exhibiting your ignorance of the subject.

 

[ShawnChris13]

I notice you posted no facts to the contrary. Who do you think pays for the emergency room visit by the un or underinsured?

Charity? And how do you expect Obamacare to remedy the situation described in your article? Obamacare ITSELF is driving up healthcare costs for uninsured and under insured. It is having the direct opposite effect on healthcare costs in America, let alone California.

Are you seriously proposing charity as a response to access to quality healthcare?



I can't believe this still has to be explained to you. Instead of paying $300 for treatment in an emergency room because the individual has no insurance, we are paying $100 for treatment in a doctors office because they are insured. See the savings already? By subsidizing the uninsured so they can purchase insurance, you are lowering the cost for everyone.



Another example of how this lower costs...individual does not have insurance so they don't make regular doctor visits...which means they ignore the signs of diabetes until it is too late because they are now being treated in the emergency room, where the only option is costly surgery removing the limb and requiring extensive rehabilitation. Which treatment do you think costs less?



The Affordable Care Act has had an effect on the cost of healthcare costs..it's been slowing them down.



The health-care law’s success story: Slowing down medical costs

The ACA has only slowed down costs in urban areas based on projected numbers for 2014. With slow sign ups you will see costs rise, and quote me on it. Rural areas do not have the population to support mandated healthcare at reasonable costs.

Also the metrics include young people being insured. Yet up to 26 year olds can stay on their parents' plan. This removes the majority of the young group out of the marketplace as their plans will be combined with the previous generation. The numbers required for the ACA to work are not going to show up. The only people that are going to rush and file on time are those hoping for subsidies or pre existing conditions. Which will further drive prices up. End quote.

 

[JoeB131]

[

So why do you support those who feel we can't.

Jesus, you are one stupid sum bitch.

You want to push entitlements down everyone's throats, along with all of the tax-increases that goes with it, yet you feel you have the right to criticize a retired military man who risked his life for his country, and expects the government to fulfill their obligations to him as per a legal and binding contract.

Repeating your childish accusation over and over again doesn't mean you're not full of bovine excrement.

Guy, you risked your life for big corporations. Let them take care of you in your wonder years.

Seriously, guy, you were paid at the time services were rendered.

Your argument is that we are in SUCH dire straights that we just have to cut spending, right now. But dammit, you still got your hand out. And I'm not even talking about you being the Section 8 Slumlord of Ft. Whatever.

I don't want to push entitlements down anyone's throat. I just think government can run health care better than the private sector - because it already does. MediCare runs vastly better than Cigna. The Canadian system works vastly better than the US.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Had some fun there. If you don't understand that this is a classic quote from Big Trouble well pity you.


But this is the way Candy should have been treated that night. Man she needed to be bitch slapped to the next tomorrow. And one more mother fucking time no self respecting conservative should ever go on with her without confronting her on what she did that night.

Have balls and bitch slap the douche bag. Back up Romney. Attack the piece of shit.

Actually, other Republicans were happy to see Romney go down, they thought he was a Mormon Douchebag, too.

Frankly, no one has ever won a debate by stomping off the stage or attacking the moderator or even being a bad sport. Remember when Al Gore sighed during his debate with Bush? It was considered immature and in poor form? No one remembers anything else he said in that debate, or even what he sighed at, but dammit, he sighed.

The thing is, Romney made an assertation that wasn't true. Crowley corrected him, and Obama had a good laugh.

 

[JoeB131]

[


VA benefit reform is an issue worthy of discussion. Even welfare reform. But if you did 20 years you receive a monthly check at half of your highest earnings while serving. Not everyone deals with the same frustration as vets and find it hard to relate.

My issue with welfare and low income benefits is how poorly the programs are run. So much fraud ensues in all these programs. Not to mention that the government believes it's ok to randomly drug test active duty service members while leaving the free assistance recipients unaccountable for following the law.

Instead of sending $25 million to Kenya for a voter ID program (which would be racist here) use that money to pay for drug tests for anyone requesting government assistance.

Muddy's main frustration in life is that he's a heartless asshole, and doesn't understand why the rest of the world isn't.

I would agree, some of the programs are poorly run. But the real problem is that we don't garuntee every American a renumerative job.

I'd have no problem if we replace Welfare with Workfare.

Drug testing... meh, kind of a waste of money.

 

[Seawytch]

from your own link:

Paying For Urgent Care Visits

Care at urgent care centers is paid for on a fee-for-service basis. They usually accept most private health insurance plans, with co-pays averaging between $25-$50. A self-paying individual will usually be asked to make a down payment for the visit, with other charges billed at a later date. Cash discounts are often offered for the uninsured.

did you at least read your OWN LINK?

It states exactly what I have said above - walk-in clinic or urgent care center - costs much less and people go THERE to treat relatively minor problems.

Some people go there...that does not change the number of people going to emergency rooms for non urgent care.

Again, why do you think you (your insurance, actually) pay $15 dollars for a $2 box of tissues during a stay in the hospital?

yes, it does change a lot.

people coming to the ER are being charged upfront at least 150$ - and if your reason for coming is really not that emergent - you are much better off going to those urgent care/walk-in clinics, otherwise you are not only paying twice as much, you wait five times as much.

Why the hospital is charging as much as it does is a totally different item of discussion.

I simply object to your example, because it is not the main reason people go to the ER. If they do - they usually really need to, not because of the lack of insurance, but because the medical necessity and severity.


And obamacare is not going to solve it - because it is much cheaper to pay for a sore throat visit in an urgent care clinic 75-100 than to pay a premium, deductible and a co-pay afterwards.

Never, once, did I say that routine visits were the main reason people went to the ER, you pulled that one out of your fourth point of contact. What I said was that the insured pay more because of the uninsured. You have provided nothing to counter that claim.

 

[rightwinger]

Except the Congressmen are NOT the government

They are my representative to the government. If I do not like how I am being represented, they lose my vote

Given that Republicans only give a shit about the wealthy......I see no reason to give them my vote

have the rich gotten richer under Obama? has the gap between the wealthy and poor lessened? What about Obama himself? hasn't he firmly planted himself as a 1 percenter in his 5 years in office?

Which has nothing to do with why people will not vote Republican

Republicans have fallen on their swords to help the wealthy while they block bills to help working Americans

Democrats have labled Republicans as only being concerned about the rich....Why can't Republicans prove otherwise?

 

[Seawytch]

They are my representative to the government. If I do not like how I am being represented, they lose my vote

Given that Republicans only give a shit about the wealthy......I see no reason to give them my vote

have the rich gotten richer under Obama? has the gap between the wealthy and poor lessened? What about Obama himself? hasn't he firmly planted himself as a 1 percenter in his 5 years in office?

Which has nothing to do with why people will not vote Republican

Republicans have fallen on their swords to help the wealthy while they block bills to help working Americans

Democrats have labled Republicans as only being concerned about the rich....Why can't Republicans prove otherwise?

Six in 10 Americans say Republicans have placed too much emphasis on protecting the wealthy from tax rate increases at the expense of pursuing the interests of those of more modest means, the poll shows. More than half of independents -- 58 percent -- hold that view.

Republicans Deemed Too Pro-Rich

 

[candycorn]

No it isn't

It's called doing what needs to be done.......something Republicans are falling short on

No, they create crisis after crisis and then act like they're the only solution.

Ever notice that many of their issues weren't considered a problem till they started harping about them? Most of the rest of us were just fine till they started stirring up a shitstorm.

Name one

WMDs in Iraq for one. Bush said we had to go in to prevent Sadaam from giving them to terrorists or using them on Israel. As it turns out, he cooked the intel and we found no WMDs.

The raising of the color coded threat alert right before the election...even Tom Ridge says it was politically motivated.

 

[BlackSand]

Which has nothing to do with why people will not vote Republican

Republicans have fallen on their swords to help the wealthy while they block bills to help working Americans

Democrats have labled Republicans as only being concerned about the rich....Why can't Republicans prove otherwise?

Unlike in 1995 when the government shutdown was decidedly blamed on Republicans in a 46-27% margin … The recent shutdown produced a 39-36% margin blaming the Republicans.
More telling numbers report that when asked if their party "should stand by your principles, even if it means causing a government shutdown" … 49% of Republicans said it was, to the 18% of Democrats that replied the same.

As I have always said … If you don't have any principles worth standing up for … It is easy to be a Democrat and win.

.

 

[rightwinger]

Which has nothing to do with why people will not vote Republican

Republicans have fallen on their swords to help the wealthy while they block bills to help working Americans

Democrats have labled Republicans as only being concerned about the rich....Why can't Republicans prove otherwise?

Unlike in 1995 when the government shutdown was decidedly blamed on Republicans in a 46-27% margin … The recent shutdown produced a 39-36% margin blaming the Republicans.
More telling numbers report that when asked if their party "should stand by your principles, even if it means causing a government shutdown" … 49% of Republicans said it was, to the 18% of Democrats that replied the same.

As I have always said … If you don't have any principles worth standing up for … It is easy to be a Democrat and win.

.

Shutdown is a different issue and Republicans once again screwed the pooch on that one

The issue at hand is the branding of what currently passes as the Republican Party

- In bed with the wealthy
- Anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-minority
- Fractured party with no leadership
- The Party of NO
- The Party of Stupid