Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by nykshaknbake:

I think working for different gov't branches with different puposes is not working for the same employer. You can be proud of the police force or the national lab you work for but think the government as a whole is inefficient and corrupt. To say otherwise has a Bush-like you're either with us or against us feel.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by izybx:

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by izybx:

Posted by firefly:

I was wondering what you guys think about what Obama wants to do in the US with national healthcare.

I can give you my experiences. The NHS in the UK is flawed. The waiting times can be loooong. The nurses are underpaid and therefore not very good. It can sometimes get bogged down under its own red tape. And other problems.

Despite all that, anyone who says that having a National Health Service is a bad idea, is comletely and utterly insane. The thought that having to buy your own healthcare on an anual basis from companies that vie with each other for your business and therefore drive down spending is better then having a free healthcare option is so ridiculous it borders on the laughable.
I challenge anyone to explain to me why some people in the US think having an NHS in the US is a a bad idea. I cant give you all the amazing stories about the things the NHS do on a daily basis in the UK, because this page isnt long enough. My own experiences with them have been almost all great. And even the ones which werent that good are counterbalanced by the fact that its a free service. Let me say the again. Its. Free. What more is there to say?

Its not free health care. If you have a job you will pay for it in higher taxes. If you think the government can lower costs than look at the post office, the federal government in general, nearly every state budget and any government run program. They are all close to being bankrupt, in massive debt, and examples of gross inefficiency. Im sure you have amazing stories about your health care, but to be honest im not interested. My health care is great. I have a 15 dollar co pay for an MRI. I dont want it changed. End of story.

So. Its. NOT. Free. Im going to have to pay for your free health care. So no thanks.

What would be your co-pay if you were laid off from your job? Also you say cite various government agencies as being inefficient so I'm curious as to why you would choose employment with a government entity in the NYPD?

The Health Care sector has donated more then $154 million dollars to Federal lawmakers in the past year so with that knowledge I have very little hope for legitimate health care reform.

[Edited by - bitty41 on 09-13-2009 8:48 PM]

Why do I have a job In the NYPD? What the hell does that have to do with anything?

Her point was that you're criticizing government for being inefficient and wasteful apparently without caring about the fact that you're a government employee who would be looking for a job if it weren't for the government. Why do you choose to work for an employer you have such low regard for? I teach at a private college that I u am proud of. If I held such low regard for my employer, I'd leave and find an organization I could proudly call myself a part of.

Of course the government has inefficiencies--the only point is that you still get more for the dollar in any government-provided health care program than in these for-profit corporations. Look at any objective rating system. I cited the WHO data because it's very comprehensive. If you feel that your portion of the government (the Police Dept if you have the same job as Izy.) is an honorable portion portion that you're proud of, then how do you or Izy know in advance that a portion of the government that provides health care to the sick and suffering is not also going to be an honorable one you'd be proud of?

[Edited by - bonn1997 on 09-14-2009 2:16 PM]

Posted by nykshaknbake:

Large US government adventures are largely wasteful. (I won't argue about that now). I don't think we should invest the trillions because who knows it might just work. The problems with our health care system isn't that the government isn't controlling the whole thing. I am part of the system that takes care of sick people in need and its plenty honorable without the government dictating it. It defeintly needs changes but not a change for the worse.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by nykshaknbake:

I think working for different gov't branches with different puposes is not working for the same employer. You can be proud of the police force or the national lab you work for but think the government as a whole is inefficient and corrupt. To say otherwise has a Bush-like you're either with us or against us feel.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by izybx:

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by izybx:

Posted by firefly:

I was wondering what you guys think about what Obama wants to do in the US with national healthcare.

I can give you my experiences. The NHS in the UK is flawed. The waiting times can be loooong. The nurses are underpaid and therefore not very good. It can sometimes get bogged down under its own red tape. And other problems.

Despite all that, anyone who says that having a National Health Service is a bad idea, is comletely and utterly insane. The thought that having to buy your own healthcare on an anual basis from companies that vie with each other for your business and therefore drive down spending is better then having a free healthcare option is so ridiculous it borders on the laughable.
I challenge anyone to explain to me why some people in the US think having an NHS in the US is a a bad idea. I cant give you all the amazing stories about the things the NHS do on a daily basis in the UK, because this page isnt long enough. My own experiences with them have been almost all great. And even the ones which werent that good are counterbalanced by the fact that its a free service. Let me say the again. Its. Free. What more is there to say?

Its not free health care. If you have a job you will pay for it in higher taxes. If you think the government can lower costs than look at the post office, the federal government in general, nearly every state budget and any government run program. They are all close to being bankrupt, in massive debt, and examples of gross inefficiency. Im sure you have amazing stories about your health care, but to be honest im not interested. My health care is great. I have a 15 dollar co pay for an MRI. I dont want it changed. End of story.

So. Its. NOT. Free. Im going to have to pay for your free health care. So no thanks.

What would be your co-pay if you were laid off from your job? Also you say cite various government agencies as being inefficient so I'm curious as to why you would choose employment with a government entity in the NYPD?

The Health Care sector has donated more then $154 million dollars to Federal lawmakers in the past year so with that knowledge I have very little hope for legitimate health care reform.

[Edited by - bitty41 on 09-13-2009 8:48 PM]

Why do I have a job In the NYPD? What the hell does that have to do with anything?

Her point was that you're criticizing government for being inefficient and wasteful apparently without caring about the fact that you're a government employee who would be looking for a job if it weren't for the government. Why do you choose to work for an employer you have such low regard for? I teach at a private college that I u am proud of. If I held such low regard for my employer, I'd leave and find an organization I could proudly call myself a part of.

Of course the government has inefficiencies--the only point is that you still get more for the dollar in any government-provided health care program than in these for-profit corporations. Look at any objective rating system. I cited the WHO data because it's very comprehensive. If you feel that your portion of the government (the Police Dept if you have the same job as Izy.) is an honorable portion portion that you're proud of, then how do you or Izy know in advance that a portion of the government that provides health care to the sick and suffering is not also going to be an honorable one you'd be proud of?

[Edited by - bonn1997 on 09-14-2009 2:16 PM]

Do you have any evidence to support any of your claims? Without evidence, all you're doing is expressing your personal opinions. I've already cited research evidence contradicting each opinion you've expressed. We can debate research evidence and debate what conclusions ought to follow from that evidence but there is no reason to debate opinions.

[Edited by - bonn1997 on 09-15-2009 3:38 PM]

Posted by martin:

Posted by nykshaknbake:

Large US government adventures are largely wasteful. (I won't argue about that now). I don't think we should invest the trillions because who knows it might just work. The problems with our health care system isn't that the government isn't controlling the whole thing. I am part of the system that takes care of sick people in need and its plenty honorable without the government dictating it. It defeintly needs changes but not a change for the worse.

I would agree with you that, in general, any large entities are wasteful; it just makes sense without having to resort to stats, examples, etc.

BUT, I don't think that we can attribute "investment of trillions" to what Obama and the gov't want to with regards to having a Public Option (I am assuming that's what we are talking about with regards to this whole health care system thing).

2 points: 1) currently the Republicans and older folks (generally) are either arguing or scared to death that Medicare will at all be cut; this leads me to believe that a (HUGE) govt run health care agency is doing something right. 2) Obama is proposing that the Public Option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects. I take that to mean that it will not be subsidized by govt "trillions" and would have to compete for business against private insurers (if it is wasteful, it wont be able to complete).

The Public Option is a small part of the overall proposal. The other parts are meant to fix what IS wrong when you don't have gov't involvement - affordable choices, requirement by everyone to HAVE insurance, no denying coverage for preexisting condition, etc.

Not sure I am exactly responding to your post or points, but ...

Posted by nykshaknbake:

Bitty it's very ironic you'd be calling me a hypocrite. I never supportted huge government expenditures in the past 8 years. I have no idea how you came to the conclusion I did. Or maybe you're talking out of your *** as usual. The NYPD is an example of how one can be proud of 1 segment of a larger organization but not think the organization itself runs well. Just because you hate white cops doesn't mean I'm a hypocritical republican. Stuff it.

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by nykshaknbake:

I think working for different gov't branches with different puposes is not working for the same employer. You can be proud of the police force or the national lab you work for but think the government as a whole is inefficient and corrupt. To say otherwise has a Bush-like you're either with us or against us feel.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by izybx:

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by izybx:

Posted by firefly:

I was wondering what you guys think about what Obama wants to do in the US with national healthcare.

I can give you my experiences. The NHS in the UK is flawed. The waiting times can be loooong. The nurses are underpaid and therefore not very good. It can sometimes get bogged down under its own red tape. And other problems.

Despite all that, anyone who says that having a National Health Service is a bad idea, is comletely and utterly insane. The thought that having to buy your own healthcare on an anual basis from companies that vie with each other for your business and therefore drive down spending is better then having a free healthcare option is so ridiculous it borders on the laughable.
I challenge anyone to explain to me why some people in the US think having an NHS in the US is a a bad idea. I cant give you all the amazing stories about the things the NHS do on a daily basis in the UK, because this page isnt long enough. My own experiences with them have been almost all great. And even the ones which werent that good are counterbalanced by the fact that its a free service. Let me say the again. Its. Free. What more is there to say?

Its not free health care. If you have a job you will pay for it in higher taxes. If you think the government can lower costs than look at the post office, the federal government in general, nearly every state budget and any government run program. They are all close to being bankrupt, in massive debt, and examples of gross inefficiency. Im sure you have amazing stories about your health care, but to be honest im not interested. My health care is great. I have a 15 dollar co pay for an MRI. I dont want it changed. End of story.

So. Its. NOT. Free. Im going to have to pay for your free health care. So no thanks.

What would be your co-pay if you were laid off from your job? Also you say cite various government agencies as being inefficient so I'm curious as to why you would choose employment with a government entity in the NYPD?

The Health Care sector has donated more then $154 million dollars to Federal lawmakers in the past year so with that knowledge I have very little hope for legitimate health care reform.

[Edited by - bitty41 on 09-13-2009 8:48 PM]

Why do I have a job In the NYPD? What the hell does that have to do with anything?

Her point was that you're criticizing government for being inefficient and wasteful apparently without caring about the fact that you're a government employee who would be looking for a job if it weren't for the government. Why do you choose to work for an employer you have such low regard for? I teach at a private college that I am proud of. If I held such low regard for my employer, I'd leave and find an organization I could proudly call myself a part of.

So being inefficient and corrupt does not apply to the NYPD? I'm quite sure that many NYers would use those very same words to describe the NYPD? I just find people like you to be incredibly hypocritical because the Republicans are screaming about outrageous spending, yet these same people were mostly silent for the previous 8 years of over-spending?

Now these guys I can understand why they protect their interests damn look at these salaries!

ANNUAL COMPENSATION OF HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY EXECUTIVES (2006 and 2007 figures):

Ronald A. Williams, Chair/ CEO, Aetna Inc., $23,045,834

H. Edward Hanway, Chair/ CEO, Cigna Corp, $30.16 million

David B. Snow, Jr, Chair/ CEO, Medco Health, $21.76 million

Michael B. MCallister, CEO, Humana Inc, $20.06 million

Stephen J. Hemsley, CEO, UnitedHealth Group, $13,164,529

Angela F. Braly, President/ CEO, Wellpoint, $9,094,771

Dale B. Wolf, CEO, Coventry Health Care, $20.86 million

Jay M. Gellert, President/ CEO, Health Net, $16.65 million

William C. Van Faasen, Chairman, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, $3 million plus $16.4 million in retirement benefits

Charlie Baker, President/ CEO, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, $1.5 million

James Roosevelt, Jr., CEO, Tufts Associated Health Plans, $1.3 million

Cleve L. Killingsworth, President/CEO Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, $3.6 million

Raymond McCaskey, CEO, Health Care Service Corp (Blue Cross Blue Shield), $10.3 million

Daniel P. McCartney, CEO, Healthcare Services Group, Inc, $ 1,061,513

Daniel Loepp, CEO, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, $1,657,555

Todd S. Farha, CEO, WellCare Health Plans, $5,270,825

Michael F. Neidorff, CEO, Centene Corp, $8,750,751

Daniel Loepp, CEO, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, $1,657,555

Todd S. Farha, CEO, WellCare Health Plans, $5,270,825

Michael F. Neidorff, CEO, Centene Corp, $8,750,751

How did we go from discussing health care to me hating white New York City cops? PAY ATTENTION, the only reason why I brought up the NYPD is because izybx works for them. If he worked as City Councilman or a MTA bus driver I would have made the same point. Let me reiterate my point was that if he had such distaste for the government then why did he choose employment with a government entity. Now do you get it?