Nationalized Health Care

[philhos]

Glenn Beck's take on national health care from his radio show, yesterday. http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/11886/

Note: I edited out only the parts that don't talk about health care and extraneous talk (like 'um's and 'ah's).
Let's talk about healthcare. That's where everybody is -- you know, "We've got to have healthcare, healthcare is unaffordable in America. The Canadians, the Canadian healthcare system, that's fantastic." Really? You know the guy who designed the Canadian healthcare system now admits that it's in a crisis? The guy who designed the Canadian healthcare system says it's in a crisis and he's now advocating private control of much of the system and we're going towards that? What the heck is wrong with us? He said, "We thought we could resolve the system's problems by rationing services or injecting massive amounts of new money into it." This is the guy who created the Canadian healthcare system. "We thought we would solve the problems by rationing services." Oh, that's fantastic. I love rationing healthcare. He now says it means a radical overhaul. "We're proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so people can exercise their freedom of choice."

Meanwhile in the U.K., the U.K. is restricting access to the use of drugs it knows it will work because the U.K. can't pay for them. There is a drug out, Tarceva, I think it is. It's for lung cancer. Listen to this. "Despite numerous studies showing that the drug significantly prolongs the life of cancer patients and the unanimous endorsement of lung cancer specialists throughout the U.K., the government has determined that a drug is too expensive to cover." Oh, well, that's fantastic. How about this. There's an arthritis drug out there. It's the only drug clinically proven to improve severe rheumatoid arthritis. The National Institute of Health and Clinical Effectiveness, or NICE, as that's called in the U.K., decided that it would not be cost-effective to give this drug to patients. How do they come up with these decisions? Comparative effective research is so easily misused because it looks only at the average patient. Not you. Just the average patient. They focus on which drugs on average are the cheapest and most effective. So they don't look at you as an individual anymore. You are literally a number. If you fit into the average, well, you're going to be fine. If you are outside of the average, ***** to be you, huh? They overlook important factors like age, race, gender, lifestyle. So even if your doctor says that this drug for your lung cancer is the right one for you, the government says, not going to pay for it because it's not cost-effective for the average patient.

From that point on he starts talking about socialism, the old left vs. the new left, etc.

So, do you agree, disagree?

[IgnoreME]

Glenn Beck's take on national health care from his radio show, yesterday. http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/11886/

Note: I edited out only the parts that don't talk about health care and extraneous talk (like 'um's and 'ah's).


From that point on he starts talking about socialism, the old left vs. the new left, etc.

So, do you agree, disagree?


Just showing the government has no business being in my personal affairs. Less government is more government!

[CloeHokie]

I agree. The way Canada does it will just not work here IMO. We should just make it cheap for everyone esp children. The insurance companies are taking a lot of money from Americans. 6 years ago I was having anxiety and got some pills to help out. What happened a month later? My health insurance went up double! I do not smoke, had never been on medication before, and was in great health. I had been paying it my whole life and never used it so the first time I do my rate doubles??? The system needs to be fixed but I think the best way is to make a more fair system of pricing for everyone.

The second part I agree with completely.I feel like the Drug companies and gov have been ripping people off and picking and choosing the best way to do it for years. Someone needs to put a stop to it and get back to the main effort of healing and curing rather than which pill can we makke more money on.

[HearUsRoar]

There's no place for a Nationalized Health Care system in this country.

If I've said it once, I've said it 1,000 times, there is no such thing as a Utopia. We need health care reform in such a way that it stops lining the pockets of lobbysits and causes doctors to leave the profession due to exponentially rising malpractice insurance costs.

That's a start, leave the Socialistic garbage out of this country.

[philhos]

I think another part of the problem that is overlooked are those who abuse the system.

We have people suing doctor's who shouldn't be, causing their malpractice insurance to skyrocket, 'causing many of them to leave the state and possibly leave the work.

Then, you also have people who go to the doctor too much (because its free). They sneeze, time to go to the doctor. They cough, time to go to the doctor. They haven't pooped since yesterday, time to go to the doctor.

So, add this to the list of issues.

[CloeHokie]

I think another part of the problem that is overlooked are those who abuse the system.

We have people suing doctor's who shouldn't be, causing their malpractice insurance to skyrocket, 'causing many of them to leave the state and possibly leave the work.

Then, you also have people who go to the doctor too much (because its free). They sneeze, time to go to the doctor. They cough, time to go to the doctor. They haven't pooped since yesterday, time to go to the doctor.

So, add this to the list of issues.

I agree. This country has become sue happy. People will look for any reason to sue and that has caused many companies to be very cautious. Reminds me of the family guy when Peter tries to sue his doctor for a rectal exam.

[HearUsRoar]

I think another part of the problem that is overlooked are those who abuse the system.

We have people suing doctor's who shouldn't be, causing their malpractice insurance to skyrocket, 'causing many of them to leave the state and possibly leave the work.

Then, you also have people who go to the doctor too much (because its free). They sneeze, time to go to the doctor. They cough, time to go to the doctor. They haven't pooped since yesterday, time to go to the doctor.

So, add this to the list of issues.

Look one post above yours bro. :lol:

[CloeHokie]

Look one post above yours bro. :lol:

:lol:....



:thumbsup:

[IgnoreME]

I just don't like the idea of having to pay for other people's healthcare. My hard earned money should not go to people too lazy to get their own healthcoverage.


"Come to think of it, it was a pretty standard exam"

"Are you sure judge? Or was all scarey, grainy, and all black and white."

"Arrr, trust me, I be a doctor"

[BANJAXED]

I agree. The way Canada does it will just not work here IMO. We should just make it cheap for everyone esp children. The insurance companies are taking a lot of money from Americans. 6 years ago I was having anxiety and got some pills to help out. What happened a month later? My health insurance went up double! I do not smoke, had never been on medication before, and was in great health. I had been paying it my whole life and never used it so the first time I do my rate doubles??? The system needs to be fixed but I think the best way is to make a more fair system of pricing for everyone.

The second part I agree with completely.I feel like the Drug companies and gov have been ripping people off and picking and choosing the best way to do it for years. Someone needs to put a stop to it and get back to the main effort of healing and curing rather than which pill can we makke more money on.

It's the hospital contractors/ hospital conglomerates in you're area that are shifting their weight around so their doctors and hospitals can make more money. It is especially prevalent in major market areas. The Hospitals and Doctors are being greedy.

[CloeHokie]

It's the hospital contractors/ hospital conglomerates in you're area that are shifting their weight around so their doctors and hospitals can make more money. It is especially prevalent in major market areas. The Hospitals and Doctors are being greedy.

Then why did my insurance double the first time I ever used it? I never go to the doctor. That needs to stop.

[jamiethelanky]

If there is no such thing as a Utoopia, why does it seem like I'm living in it? Sure there are drawbacks, but the NHS by and large works, the ban on guns works, the minimum wage works.

Every prediction of doom that should've happened in Britain as yet hasn't.

This leads me to one of two conclusions:
1. That such problems with such schemes are insignificant enough to not stop their success.
2. America just wouldn't be able to do it due to governmental ineptitude.

[philhos]

governmental ineptitude.

Bingo. It's probably the #1 reason why any socialistic ideals would absolutely NOT work here.

[BANJAXED]

Then why did my insurance double the first time I ever used it? I never go to the doctor. That needs to stop.

Because of the new contracted rate that that physician or physician group demanded to be paid . It doubled because your physician wanted to be paid double on that specific treatment that you had done on you. Individual treatments are contracted by physician and are unqiue to that physican or group. Basically, you're doctor and/or hospital wanted to be paid more for want you had done.

do you have individual insurance or is it provided by you're provider?
did you go to a PPO or someone out of network?
do you have rich benefits from your employer or is it crap because they just care about cutting cost?

these are all important considerations when using you're health insurance.

[CloeHokie]

Because of the new contracted rate that that physician or physician group demanded to be paid . It doubled because your physician wanted to be paid double on that specific treatment that you had done on you. Individual treatments are contracted by physician and are unqiue to that physican or group. Basically, you're doctor and/or hospital wanted to be paid more for want you had done.

All they did was give me a prescription for Zoloft for anxiety which I stopped taking after one bottle due to the side effects. I had been paying insurance for 10 years with maybe one visit every 2 years and no prescriptions outside of anti-biotics a few times. I dont know where the problem is but seems to me I had alreay paid my insurnce company 120 a month for ten years without making them pay for much for me at all. I go in for one prescription and it goes up to 205 a month! Now my insurance company is the one sending me the bill and I find it hard to believe that the a-load of money they made off me for 10 years couldnt be used to cover any Doctor fees. Sorry not buying it.

[CloeHokie]

Because of the new contracted rate that that physician or physician group demanded to be paid . It doubled because your physician wanted to be paid double on that specific treatment that you had done on you. Individual treatments are contracted by physician and are unqiue to that physican or group. Basically, you're doctor and/or hospital wanted to be paid more for want you had done.

do you have individual insurance or is it provided by you're provider?
did you go to a PPO or someone out of network?
do you have rich benefits from your employer or is it crap because they just care about cutting cost?

these are all important considerations when using you're health insurance.

I now have my company pay for it. But the example I used was from about 6 years ago. I was on individual with Anthem.

[BANJAXED]

All they did was give me a prescription for Zoloft for anxiety which I stopped taking after one bottle due to the side effects. I had been paying insurance for 10 years with maybe one visit every 2 years and no prescriptions outside of anti-biotics a few times. I dont know where the problem is but seems to me I had alreay paid my insurnce company 120 a month for ten years without making them pay for much for me at all. I go in for one prescription and it goes up to 205 a month! Now my insurance company is the one sending me the bill and I find it hard to believe that the a-load of money they made off me for 10 years couldnt be used to cover any Doctor fees. Sorry not buying it.

Well, when you begin taking Zoloft (anti-dperession/aniexty) you become more of a health risk. Try applying for life or disability insurance too - during the medical history questionaire (under prescriptions) you will undoubtably need to tell them about it. This will increase you're premium too.

FYI - Health Insurance companies don't really make $ off prescriptions. The price is based off what the drug co sells it for and the margains are almost non-existant.

If we go to universal healthcare - you will be paying for all the higher-risk patients across the board and you won't have any control what-so-ever on the premium. At least now you can choose not to smoke or take prescriptions, etc etc.

[EatonFan]

Healthcare (Part I):
This is a subject that is near and dear to me. I’ve studied many of the aspects of our system and come to several conclusions. I will provide facts and links as I go.
First, our healthcare system is in terrible shape. First, we’ll go over where our system is at. http://perotcharts.com/category/challenges/healthcare/ (http://perotcharts.com/category/challenges/healthcare/)
As you can see from the charts (please flip through the several pages of charts, not just the first one CLICK "Next Page") 46% of our healthcare is funded by public funds (13% + 16% + 17% together) right now. This surprises many that nearly half of our system is funded by the government through a myriad of programs. The other 54% comes from insurers (generally out of employers pockets) at 35%, out of pocket at 13%, and the other 6-7% from (I would guess) some kind of trust funds or similar instruments. Looking at the same chart for expenditures, I don’t believe there’s anything here that truly jumps out. But, I do want you to focus on the 14% admin and 3% other professional services. That 17% is what I’ll talk about next…
http://alankatz.wordpress.com/2007/10/08/medicare-administrative-expense-reality-check/ (http://alankatz.wordpress.com/2007/10/08/medicare-administrative-expense-reality-check/)
Medicare’s administrative costs are 5.2% according to the article above, and if you adjust in the "hidden costs" as the author states, it’s more like 8% in reality. 8% vs. 17% -- Government is still handily more efficient? That makes no sense. You’re right. It doesn’t, but it’s true. The problem is the administration of the private system as it is right now. Next part coming…

[BANJAXED]

I now have my company pay for it. But the example I used was from about 6 years ago. I was on individual with Anthem.

Individual coverage can be a major pain - because you propose more of a risk because:

1. You're risk cannot be spread over the other employees in your company
2. The risk of paying the premium cannot be "leaned" on you're company either

That is why individual health insurance is so hard to get and can be extrememly expensive to maintain.

[EatonFan]

Healthcare (Part II):
I want you to think about going to the doctor right now for a routine checkup or sickness. If you have insurance, think about the hoops you have to jump through. You have a medical card. You fill out a couple of pages of paperwork. The doctor sees you and then, you go home and wait for "IT" to begin. What you ask? The bills & statements – the "This is not a bill" statement showing how much your insurer is paying vs. what you are, the in-network/out of network restrictions, the limitations of "reasonable & customary", etc. What’s more is that you get them from – your doctor, the lab, the specialist, the nursing agency, your insurer, the pharmacy, and possibly more. All of this is waste, and we’re paying for it. 17% is a large number, my friends especially on a cost that could be 20% of our GDP by the year 2015.
What’s the solution here? Simple. We need to streamline the system by implementing the following:

A medical billing database for every caregiver – doctors, hospitals, specialists, dentists, etc. Kudos to Obama’s and McCain’s plan here. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/ (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/) and here http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ba2f1c-c03f-4ac2-8cd5-5cf2edb527cf.htm (http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ba2f1c-c03f-4ac2-8cd5-5cf2edb527cf.htm) as they would like to do the same. (Both call it information technology). Mine is a bit more specific, but I think this is what both aim to do.
Standardization of insurance policies.
Reversion of insurers to non-profit companies.
Tort reform.
A phased in approach for all employers to pay 80% of premiums over a 15 year period while freezing minimum wage.

[CloeHokie]

Well, when you begin taking Zoloft (anti-dperession/aniexty) you become more of a health risk. Try applying for life or disability insurance too - during the medical history questionaire (under prescriptions) you will undoubtably need to tell them about it. This will increase you're premium too.

FYI - Health Insurance companies don't really make $ off prescriptions. The price is based off what the drug co sells it for and the margains are almost non-existant.

If we go to universal healthcare - you will be paying for all the higher-risk patients across the board and you won't have any control what-so-ever on the premium. At least now you can choose not to smoke or take prescriptions, etc etc.

Ok so i did the math here. For 7 years I paid 120 a month. Thats $10,080 that Anthem made off me. During that time I went to the doctor 6 times for being sick and thats it. Never had any prescriptions other than anti-biotics. So Anthem has made a lot of money off me correct? I go in for one prescription and now Im a bigger health risk so my insurance goes up to 205? I just dont understand how they would need to charge me more for one prescription. I never even got it refilled as it made me feel funny. I just cant see how the giant profit they had made from me went for nothing. I had been paying for insurance for 7 years and not using it. The first time I do it goes up. Something is wrong with that system.

[jamiethelanky]

Ok so i did the math here. For 7 years I paid 120 a month. Thats $10,080 that Anthem made off me. During that time I went to the doctor 6 times for being sick and thats it. Never had any prescriptions other than anti-biotics. So Anthem has made a lot of money off me correct? I go in for one prescription and now Im a bigger health risk so my insurance goes up to 205? I just dont understand how they would need to charge me more for one prescription. I never even got it refilled as it made me feel funny. I just cant see how the giant profit they had made from me went for nothing. I had been paying for insurance for 7 years and not using it. The first time I do it goes up. Something is wrong with that system.
In the last year I have visited the doctor six times, and it has cost me a total of £49.70, that's about $100.

Interesting comparison.

[CloeHokie]

In the last year I have visited the doctor six times, and it has cost me a total of £49.70, that's about $100.

Interesting comparison.

Thats more like it. There has to be somewhere in the middle that we can all agree on

[xxlt]

Glenn Beck's take on national health care from his radio show, yesterday. http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/11886/

Note: I edited out only the parts that don't talk about health care and extraneous talk (like 'um's and 'ah's).


From that point on he starts talking about socialism, the old left vs. the new left, etc.

So, do you agree, disagree?

Well, GB sounds almost as credible as Sean Hannity. Maybe (and that is an enormous maybe) the "guy who designed the Canadian system" really did "say it is in crisis." But if you were a professional entertainer (or whatever the hell GB is considered) and you were going to do a show on health care and lead with a statement from "the guy who designed the Canadian system" don't you think maybe you would bother to learn "the guy's name." Don't you think you would bother to tell your listener where, when, and how he articulated the "crisis." Was he writing in an industry periodical, testifying in parliament, drunk off his *** on a bar stool talking off the record to dear old GB? I would think that someone in the business of "infotainment" or what ever it is those clowns on talk radio call what they do would want to "inform" a bit better than saying "the guy" said "fill in the blank with what I want you to believe." For Christ sake, Jay Leno and John Stewart set up a JOKE better than GB set up this "discussion of the issues."

But, I guess there really isn't any need for Glen or Sean to ever name a source or use the source's own words or put them in context. Instead, they can just invent a source and put words in his or her mouth. They know the ditto heads will just nod, and then go tell the folks who didn't tune in all about it on the internet. Smashing!

[BANJAXED]

Ok so i did the math here. For 7 years I paid 120 a month. Thats $10,080 that Anthem made off me. During that time I went to the doctor 6 times for being sick and thats it. Never had any prescriptions other than anti-biotics. So Anthem has made a lot of money off me correct? I go in for one prescription and now Im a bigger health risk so my insurance goes up to 205? I just dont understand how they would need to charge me more for one prescription. I never even got it refilled as it made me feel funny. I just cant see how the giant profit they had made from me went for nothing. I had been paying for insurance for 7 years and not using it. The first time I do it goes up. Something is wrong with that system.

Does the company you work for go back 4 years or more to use profits from then to pay for things they do now? :hmm: No, business is general works from current margains. Wouldn't it be nice if business worked this way but sadly - they have a lot of immediate costs to pay for. (I.e. salaries, rent, etc etc) - they can't just grab that 10K and "help" you.

[xxlt]

In the last year I have visited the doctor six times, and it has cost me a total of £49.70, that's about $100.

Interesting comparison.

But Jamie, ENGLAND IS IN CRISIS! WAKE THE **** UP MAN!
:rotf:

[xxlt]

Thats more like it. There has to be somewhere in the middle that we can all agree on

So you would be content meeting in the middle and Anthem ****ing you out of $5,000?!

I don't think Jamie wants to meet in the middle. I think he is happy with six doctor trips for $100. Those crazy Brits!

[EatonFan]

Healthcare (Part III):
Standardization of insurance policies. Right now there are literally hundreds or thousands of policies on the market. All of them are marketed well and sold, but the problem from the employers’ standpoint (or anyone wanting to buy a policy) is there is no apples to apples comparison. This policy has X deductible while this other policy has Y. This X policy covers this. Y does not. X doesn’t cover this. Y does. X has a prescription plan. So does Y, but doesn’t cover aaa drug, yet has lower co-pays. Then there’s Z over here that covers it all, but limits the coverage in some other language. Please do yourself a favor if you don’t understand what I’m talking about. (Note: I have a life & health insurance license). Pick up two policies and try to compare them. You can’t.
Standardize the policies that all insurers can offer to about 15 with about 10 riders. That’s a combination of 150 variations, but on a base of 15 standard policies. Want to compare two companies health fringe benefits? OK. Company A is offering policy #1 (the most basic of policies with $X deductible) while Company B is offering policy #2. If you’re choosing between jobs and the salary is the same. Company B has the advantage. Also, the companies can actually compare standard policies on an apples to apples basis between insurers. Insurer M offers policy #3 at $1000 per month. Insurer K offers policy #3 at $950 per month. Of course, there can be other factors – service, claims department hospitality, financial strength of the companies involved, but the most basic factor, price, can at least be compared – Apples to Apples. Competition could then kick in and help in the free market. Capitalism at its best. Next up... the Medical database...

[EatonFan]

In the last year I have visited the doctor six times, and it has cost me a total of £49.70, that's about $100.

Interesting comparison.

How much in taxes did you pay? <_<

[BANJAXED]

So you would be content meeting in the middle and Anthem ****ing you out of $5,000?!

I don't think Jamie wants to meet in the middle. I think he is happy with six doctor trips for $100. Those crazy Brits!

So you really think you should be able to add up your premiums over the past years that you haven't had to use you're insurance and use the difference?

Com'on now be reasonable - those premiums are used to pay the other claims of other patients that have the same insurance carrier that you have for that year.

[jamiethelanky]

How much in taxes did you pay? <_<
More than you, but I am willing to do so because it is for the good of the country and I want to see my country be the best in the world.

Simple as that.

[CloeHokie]

So you really think you should be able to add up your premiums over the past years that you haven't had to use you're insurance and use the difference?

Com'on now be reasonable - those premiums are used to pay the other claims of other patients that have the same insurance carrier that you have for that year.

Yes! You be reasonable! I gave them 10,000 and the minute I try and use it they raise my rates! That is unreasonable! I know they are using my money elsewhere but when I pay for a service I should get it. If they are miss using the money I send them every month that is thier problem.

[BANJAXED]

Yes! You be reasonable! I gave them 10,000 and the minute I try and use it they raise my rates! That is unreasonable! I know they are using my money elsewhere but when I pay for a service I should get it. If they are mis using the money I send them every week that is thier problem.

Read my previous reply from page one - I think you might've missed it.

I said:

Does the company you work for go back 4 years or more to use profits from then to pay for things they do now? No, business is general works from current margains. Wouldn't it be nice if business worked this way? But sadly - they have a lot of immediate costs to pay for. (I.e. salaries, rent, etc etc) - they can't just grab that 10K and "help" you.

[HearUsRoar]

More than you, but I am willing to do so because it is for the good of the country and I want to see my country be the best in the world.

Simple as that.

So if your neighbor across the street is NOT happy paying all those taxes is it truly a Utopia or is it simply something you approve of?

Remember, in a Utopia, everyone is happy about everything, not just a select few.

[CloeHokie]

Read my previous reply from page one - I think you might've missed it.

I said:

Does the company you work for go back 4 years or more to use profits from then to pay for things they do now? No, business is general works from current margains. Wouldn't it be nice if business worked this way? But sadly - they have a lot of immediate costs to pay for. (I.e. salaries, rent, etc etc) - they can't just grab that 10K and "help" you.

Yes. At VZW we give you free phones all the time for your service. However we also PROVIDE you a service every month that you USE. Big difference between our companies. I didnt use my health insurance. When I did they charged me more. I charge people a monthly fee for a service and provide excellent cell phone network. So that is a stupid exapmle. Again, sorry. Just not buying it.

[philhos]

Well, GB sounds almost as credible as Sean Hannity. Maybe (and that is an enormous maybe) the "guy who designed the Canadian system" really did "say it is in crisis." But if you were a professional entertainer (or whatever the hell GB is considered) and you were going to do a show on health care and lead with a statement from "the guy who designed the Canadian system" don't you think maybe you would bother to learn "the guy's name." Don't you think you would bother to tell your listener where, when, and how he articulated the "crisis." Was he writing in an industry periodical, testifying in parliament, drunk off his *** on a bar stool talking off the record to dear old GB? I would think that someone in the business of "infotainment" or what ever it is those clowns on talk radio call what they do would want to "inform" a bit better than saying "the guy" said "fill in the blank with what I want you to believe." For Christ sake, Jay Leno and John Stewart set up a JOKE better than GB set up this "discussion of the issues."

First off, can you name something that Sean Hannity was wrong on?

Secondly, this was only part of the show. It's possible that Beck talked more about the guy earlier in the show. The transcript I got the part I quoted from was talking more about socialism than just healthcare. Healthcare was his opening illustration.

I understand the need to claim the source which in the transcipt I posted it's not listed, but considering the show's 3 hours long, it's possible he did in another segment. If he didn't, okay, you're right, but before you rip him a new one for not stating his source, you may want to find out for sure if he did or not.

But, I guess there really isn't any need for Glen or Sean to ever name a source or use the source's own words or put them in context. Instead, they can just invent a source and put words in his or her mouth. They know the ditto heads will just nod, and then go tell the folks who didn't tune in all about it on the internet. Smashing!

So many things wrong with this.

1) We don't know if Glenn didn't name a source earlier in the show, assuming the show's listeners would remember. (For the record, I didn't hear the entire show, just this portion, hence why I wanted to share it).
2) What does Sean have to do with this? And since you're so high strung on sources, why don't you provide your own evidence to show that Sean has made claims without naming his source?
3) Ditto heads are Rush Limbaugh fans, not Hannity or Beck fans.
4) You callin' me a ditto head for posting this? You trying to portray me in a negative light?

So what I've taken from your response is that you don't really have a counterargument to anything Glenn said so instead you just attack him personally and throw in Sean Hannity too.

Did you go to GA9's School of Master Debaters?

[CloeHokie]

First off, can you name something that Sean Hannity was wrong on?

Secondly, this was only part of the show. It's possible that Beck talked more about the guy earlier in the show. The transcript I got the part I quoted from was talking more about socialism than just healthcare. Healthcare was his opening illustration.

I understand the need to claim the source which in the transcipt I posted it's not listed, but considering the show's 3 hours long, it's possible he did in another segment. If he didn't, okay, you're right, but before you rip him a new one for not stating his source, you may want to find out for sure if he did or not.



So many things wrong with this.

1) We don't know if Glenn didn't name a source earlier in the show, assuming the show's listeners would remember. (For the record, I didn't hear the entire show, just this portion, hence why I wanted to share it).
2) What does Sean have to do with this? And since you're so high strung on sources, why don't you provide your own evidence to show that Sean has made claims without naming his source?
3) Ditto heads are Rush Limbaugh fans, not Hannity or Beck fans.
4) You callin' me a ditto head for posting this? You trying to portray me in a negative light?

So what I've taken from your response is that you don't really have a counterargument to anything Glenn said so instead you just attack him personally and throw in Sean Hannity too.

Did you go to GA9's School of Master Debaters?

http://www.thejsworld.com/fifth/wp-content/photos/cantreadgood.jpg

[HearUsRoar]

First off, can you name something that Sean Hannity was wrong on?

Secondly, this was only part of the show. It's possible that Beck talked more about the guy earlier in the show. The transcript I got the part I quoted from was talking more about socialism than just healthcare. Healthcare was his opening illustration.

I understand the need to claim the source which in the transcipt I posted it's not listed, but considering the show's 3 hours long, it's possible he did in another segment. If he didn't, okay, you're right, but before you rip him a new one for not stating his source, you may want to find out for sure if he did or not.



So many things wrong with this.

1) We don't know if Glenn didn't name a source earlier in the show, assuming the show's listeners would remember. (For the record, I didn't hear the entire show, just this portion, hence why I wanted to share it).
2) What does Sean have to do with this? And since you're so high strung on sources, why don't you provide your own evidence to show that Sean has made claims without naming his source?
3) Ditto heads are Rush Limbaugh fans, not Hannity or Beck fans.
4) You callin' me a ditto head for posting this? You trying to portray me in a negative light?

So what I've taken from your response is that you don't really have a counterargument to anything Glenn said so instead you just attack him personally and throw in Sean Hannity too.

Did you go to GA9's School of Master Debaters?

Master Debaters?

You can't do that in public. They'll straight up arrest your a..

[BANJAXED]

Yes. At VZW we give you free phones all the time for your service. However we also PROVIDE you a service every month that you USE. Big difference between our companies. I didnt use my health insurance. When I did they charged me more. I charge people a monthly fee for a service and provide excellent cell phone network. So that is a stupid exapmle. Again, sorry. Just not buying it.

I understand you're concern - but you have to realize that there is a lot more that goes into the whole process of insurance.

Yeah free cell phones and free insurance $s are kind of hard to correlate. But I'm sure you don't give out free "outdated" phones tho - I.e. ones that were sold 4 or 5 years ago? the cost of those phones undoubtedly were a realized current annual cost by VZW corporate.

[CloeHokie]

Read my previous reply from page one - I think you might've missed it.

I said:

Does the company you work for go back 4 years or more to use profits from then to pay for things they do now? No, business is general works from current margains. Wouldn't it be nice if business worked this way? But sadly - they have a lot of immediate costs to pay for. (I.e. salaries, rent, etc etc) - they can't just grab that 10K and "help" you.

Insurance is the only industry that you pay in advance in case something happens. So you really cant compare it to any other indusrty. When you pay for services or goods you recieve them right away. So again, yes when I pay in advance for a service I expect to get that service when I need it.

[BANJAXED]

Insurance is the only industry that you pay in advance in case something happens. So you really cant compare it to any other indusrty. When you pay for services or goods you recieve them right away. So again, yes when I pay in advance for a service I expect to get that service when I need it.

Exactly, you've realized that insurance is the exception regardless if it's life, disability or health.

So therefore, you also need to realize the you can't compare it to your other services or goods - but that's essentially what youre doing and what you're getting mad about.

[CloeHokie]

I understand you're concern - but you have to realize that there is a lot more that goes into the whole process of insurance.

Yeah free cell phones and free insurance $s are kind of hard to correlate. But I'm sure you don't give out free "outdated" phones tho - I.e. ones that were sold 4 or 5 years ago? the cost of those phones undoubtedly were a realized current annual cost by VZW corporate.

A lot goes on in our business as well that most poeple dont know about but we dont jack our customers. They recieve a service based upon a plan they chose. Sound familiar? Whats the difference? We dont jack them. They get the minutes and coverage that they selected and are provided that service each month. So my complaint I have yet to have anyone answer well (not just you, I have many friends in the biz as well) is again when I pay for a service in advance in case something happens and nothing does I dont expect my rate to increase when I finaly use it 6 years later.

[CloeHokie]

Exactly, you've realized that insurance is the exception regardless if it's life, disability or health.

So therefore, you also need to realize the you can't compare it to your other services or goods - but that's essentially what youre doing and what you're getting mad about.

Im not the one that started trying to compare them. You brought up my company.

[CloeHokie]

Exactly, you've realized that insurance is the exception regardless if it's life, disability or health.

So therefore, you also need to realize the you can't compare it to your other services or goods - but that's essentially what youre doing and what you're getting mad about.

Thats the whole point though. It should be. Thats how this country is supposed to work. I provide a service and you pay me for it. I was paying for no service in case something happened. Nothing ever did and they made a lot of money off me. Then when I needed them they rasied my rate almost double. I dont see how you can see that as reasonable even if you work there. There are things about my company I can see that are not done right and I am working hard to fix them not defend them.

[BANJAXED]

Thats the whole point though. It should be. Thats how this country is supposed to work. I provide a service and you pay me for it. I was paying for no service in case something happened. Nothing ever did and they made a lot of money off me. Then when I needed them they rasied my rate almost double. I dont see how you can see that as reasonable even if you work there. There are things about my company I can see that are not done right and I am working hard to fix them not defend them.

In other industries they don't have to spread risk around. In other industries they don't base their cost on morbidity (death) rates or have to weigh risk due to pre-existing conditions or current drugs being taken. I'm not sticking up for my company I'm just tell you how things really work.

Bottom line:

You're premiums have undoubtably paid for someone's life insurance policy so their kid could actually go to college. Your're premiums have most likely given someone the ability to actually pay for their cancer treatments. I could go on....

When you truly'll need it down the road, you'll be thanking the people that are paying for it and not using it much like you are now.

[CloeHokie]

In other industries they don't have to spread risk around. In other industries they don't base their cost on morbidity (death) rates or have to weigh risk due to pre-existing conditions or current drugs being taken. I'm not sticking up for my company I'm just tell you how things really work.

Bottom line:

You're premiums have undoubtably paid for someone's life insurance policy so their kid could actually go to college. Your're premiums have most likely given someone the ability to actually pay for their cancer treatments. I could go on....

When you truly'll need it down the road, you'll be thanking the people that are paying for it and not using it much like you are now.

Well I just cant agree. My bottom line is I paid them for a long time and didnt use it. I was paying for lots of people then and I have no issue with that. I gave them 10,000 to use on other people. My problem is when I used it my rate went up. There is a big problem there and If you cant see it then you are blinded by your job.

[xxlt]

First off, can you name something that Sean Hannity was wrong on?

Secondly, this was only part of the show. It's possible that Beck talked more about the guy earlier in the show. The transcript I got the part I quoted from was talking more about socialism than just healthcare. Healthcare was his opening illustration.

I understand the need to claim the source which in the transcipt I posted it's not listed, but considering the show's 3 hours long, it's possible he did in another segment. If he didn't, okay, you're right, but before you rip him a new one for not stating his source, you may want to find out for sure if he did or not.



So many things wrong with this.

1) We don't know if Glenn didn't name a source earlier in the show, assuming the show's listeners would remember. (For the record, I didn't hear the entire show, just this portion, hence why I wanted to share it).
2) What does Sean have to do with this? And since you're so high strung on sources, why don't you provide your own evidence to show that Sean has made claims without naming his source?
3) Ditto heads are Rush Limbaugh fans, not Hannity or Beck fans.
4) You callin' me a ditto head for posting this? You trying to portray me in a negative light?

So what I've taken from your response is that you don't really have a counterargument to anything Glenn said so instead you just attack him personally and throw in Sean Hannity too.

Did you go to GA9's School of Master Debaters?

Can you name something Hannity was right on?

As far as whether Beck offered a source, I went off the information at hand: 1. philhos is notorious for asking for sources when anyone "shares something" or argues a point 2. philhos said 'here's the transcript, sans unrelated stuff like throat clearing and stuff off topic' 3. there was no source in the "shared" portion. So, based on those three things I concluded that GB failed to substantiate his claim, possibly because he made it up. I made a mental note that had it been something you disagreed with you would have pounced on the lack of a source and perhaps even suggested you didn't believe the claim. But, either since you agreed or thought GB above reproach, you didn't question it.

I don't know if he made the statement up. You don't either. But, as you have pointed out in the past - since you brought it out for sharing it is on you to prove it. So, feel free to check the transcript out and find the source or feel free to have it assumed that Beck made up the whole thing. In the minds of him, Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reilly (aka O' Liely) and their producers and employers this is acceptable practice because (pick one) a.) their job is to entertain b.) no one listening will question their authority c.) their job is to manipulate with information or, in the absence of it, misinformation d.) no one cares e.) all of the above.

So, to summarize, you offered an unsubstantiated set of quotes, and I asked for documentation. When I asked, you essentially admitted that they may or may not have been made up. Any argument you had offered was built on these statements that you admit may have been fabrications. Then you questioned my debating skills.

Well, if it turns out anything Beck talked about has any basis in reality (and it is up to you to prove that it does since you brought it up - and that is your rule, not mine) I'll be happy to debate it. Until then, cheers!

[HearUsRoar]

Can you name something Hannity was right on?

As far as whether Beck offered a source, I went off the information at hand: 1. philhos is notorious for asking for sources when anyone "shares something" or argues a point 2. philhos said 'here's the transcript, sans unrelated stuff like throat clearing and stuff off topic' 3. there was no source in the "shared" portion. So, based on those three things I concluded that GB failed to substantiate his claim, possibly because he made it up. I made a mental note that had it been something you disagreed with you would have pounced on the lack of a source and perhaps even suggested you didn't believe the claim. But, either since you agreed or thought GB above reproach, you didn't question it.

I don't know if he made the statement up. You don't either. But, as you have pointed out in the past - since you brought it out for sharing it is on you to prove it. So, feel free to check the transcript out and find the source or feel free to have it assumed that Beck made up the whole thing. In the minds of him, Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reilly (aka O' Liely) and their producers and employers this is acceptable practice because (pick one) a.) their job is to entertain b.) no one listening will question their authority c.) their job is to manipulate with information or, in the absence of it, misinformation d.) no one cares e.) all of the above.

So, to summarize, you offered an unsubstantiated set of quotes, and I asked for documentation. When I asked, you essentially admitted that they may or may not have been made up. Any argument you had offered was built on these statements that you admit may have been fabrications. Then you questioned my debating skills.

Well, if it turns out anything Beck talked about has any basis in reality (and it is up to you to prove that it does since you brought it up - and that is your rule, not mine) I'll be happy to debate it. Until then, cheers!

First of all, you mentioned that Hannity does/says nothing right, phil asked for examples. The burden of proof doesn't lie with phil, it lies with you.

Secondly, do you honestly think these comments were simply made up and aired? Do you really think he committed slander on national television/radio/newspaper?

[CloeHokie]

First of all, you mentioned that Hannity does/says nothing right, phil asked for examples. The burden of proof doesn't lie with phil, it lies with you.

Secondly, do you honestly think these comments were simply made up and aired? Do you really think he committed slander on national television/radio/newspaper?

Fox news has done it before. They attacked Obama without looking into it saying he went to a Muslim school so yes I think Fox News will.

Dont even know if he is on Fox just throwin that out there

[BANJAXED]

Well I just cant agree. My bottom line is I paid them for a long time and didnt use it. I was paying for lots of people then and I have no issue with that. I gave them 10,000 to use on other people. My problem is when I used it my rate went up. There is a big problem there and If you cant see it then you are blinded by your job.

Not trying to be mean but the problem is that you're comparing apples to semi-tires.
The other problem is that you work in the Telecommunication Industry and not the Health Insurance Industry. Get a job in it and you'll see the actual nature of it and then you'll understand - because I'll be here all weekend explaining why things are the way they are.
So being blinded and actually understanding it are two totally different things.

If you're unhappy with you're insurance then get rid of it and take a risk on nothing happening to you because the rate didn't increase just because you used it - the rate increased (due to several factors) at the beginning of the fiscal year - you just need to sure to check you're mail notification when you're health insurance company sends you something.

[HearUsRoar]

Fox news has done it before. They attacked Obama without looking into it saying he went to a Muslim school so yes I think Fox News will.

Dont even know if he is on Fox just throwin that out there

Hannity is on Fox News.

But it's a different set of circumstances to say "this guy went to a Muslim school" when in fact he didn't. That could simply be a case of misinformation or misinterpretation.

But to say a man said "................................" and that be completely untrue...is called slander. I can't see anyone doing that.

[CloeHokie]

Not trying to be mean but the problem is that you're comparing apples to semi-tires.
The other problem is that you work in the Telecommunication Industry and not the Health Insurance Industry. Get a job in it and you'll see the actual nature of it and then you'll understand - because I'll be here all weekend explaining why things are the way they are.
So being blinded and actually understanding it are two totally different things.

If you're unhappy with you're insurance then get rid of it and take a risk on nothing happening to you because the rate didn't increase just because you used it - the rate increased (due to several factors) at the beginning of the fiscal year and you didn't check to see it in you're mail the notification.

Im sure if I got a job there I would see how I made lots of money ripping people off. Im not trying to be mean but the system is flawed and it will be fixed soon enough.

It did increae because I used it. They told me that in the letter they sent me telling me about the increase. It was not a new fiscal year, I know when that is.

[CloeHokie]

Hannity is on Fox News.

But it's a different set of circumstances to say "this guy went to a Muslim school" when in fact he didn't. That could simply be a case of misinformation or misinterpretation.

But to say a man said "................................" and that be completely untrue...is call slander. I can't see anyone doing that.

I would hope not, but I would not be shocked. Fox news is awful. Its thier job to report the facts not just run out with a story to smear Obama without checking.

But anyway lets stay on topic. Fox news is for another thread. :lol:

[EatonFan]

More than you, but I am willing to do so because it is for the good of the country and I want to see my country be the best in the world.

Simple as that.

So, you actually paid more than $100 in healthcare. You just paid it in higher taxes. That's my point. Your simple statement that you "only paid 49 lbs which is equivalent to $100" is not an apples to apples statement... and therefore not really true in reality.

[jamiethelanky]

So, you actually paid more than $100 in healthcare. You just paid it in higher taxes. That's my point. Your simple statement that you "only paid 49 lbs which is equivalent to $100" is not an apples to apples statement... and therefore not really true in reality.
I pay around $200 then. Still pales into insignificance against a 5-figure sum.

[BANJAXED]

Im sure if I got a job there I would see how I made lots of money ripping people off. Im not trying to be mean but the system is flawed and it will be fixed soon enough.

It did increae because I used it. They told me that in the letter they sent me telling me about the increase. It was not a new fiscal year, I know when that is.

Again, there is A LOT more too it then meets the eye my friend. But what I was saying was that you're insurance increased not because you physicially bought the prescription but because you're doctor deduced that you needed it - and thus it went into you're medical history and in turn you became more of a health risk. (depressed vs not depressed) - thats why you're health insurance premium went up. The probably of you needing medical attention iwas higher when you're depressed.

I'm done beating a dead horse. I'll agree we disagree.

[EatonFan]

I pay around $200 then. Still pales into insignificance against a 5-figure sum.

I highly doubt you pay only $200 in taxes for healthcare.

According to Perotcharts you're around 8% of GDP so taxes equivalent would likely be $3000 for the average person in the UK. Here it may be $5000. If you are a very low wage earner, you may pay a lesser % than others who make more as I believe the UK to be a progressive system. Not sure of your system there. You may be atypical of the average UK'er, and I know you are if you only pay $200 in taxes for healthcare. You would then be living off the work of others to supplement your own healthcare coverage.

[CloeHokie]

Again, there is A LOT more too it then meets the eye my friend. But what I was saying was that you're insurance increased not because you physicially bought the prescription but because you're doctor deduced that you needed it - and thus it went into you're medical history and in turn you became more of a health risk. (depressed vs not depressed) - thats why you're health insurance premium went up. The probably of you needing medical attention iwas higher when you're depressed.

I'm done beating a dead horse. I'll agree we disagree.

Lol. I gottcha. I got it for anxiety I was dealing with at the time from school and girl issues not depression. But it ended up messin with my head too much and I didnt even finsih the bottle. Im sure there is more than meets the eye. But from my point of view I payed for years without using it then when I have an anxiety attack I should not go to the doctor because my rates will go up? There should be a better way IMO. But its cool. Everryone is not going to see eye to eye on every issue. :thumbsup:

[EatonFan]

http://www.adamsmith.org/images/uploads/publications/funding-uk-healthcare.pdf

Wow. 27% VAT.

[Eleden]

I just don't like the idea of having to pay for other people's healthcare. My hard earned money should not go to people too lazy to get their own healthcoverage.


"Come to think of it, it was a pretty standard exam"

"Are you sure judge? Or was all scarey, grainy, and all black and white."

"Arrr, trust me, I be a doctor"

The reason why people don't buy it is because they can't afford it, not because they're lazy. Are you saying a recently laid off autoworker who has to feed a family of four is lazy because he can't buy Health Insurance? Are you saying the nearly 15 million hardworking Middle Class families without coverage are lazy because they can't afford it?

Just because someone hasn't been blessed with the financial security you have doesn't mean they're lazy.

And you say you don't want your "hard earned cash" being taken to pay for other people?

http://www.mikhaela.net/pictures/toons/boil071025schipveto.gif

My hard earned money should not be used to help someone too lazy to prevent a house fire. <_<

[BANJAXED]

Lol. I gottcha. I got it for anxiety I was dealing with at the time from school and girl issues not depression. But it ended up messin with my head too much and I didnt even finsih the bottle. Im sure there is more than meets the eye. But from my point of view I payed for years without using it then when I have an anxiety attack I should not go to the doctor because my rates will go up? There should be a better way IMO. But its cool. Everryone is not going to see eye to eye on every issue. :thumbsup:

Oddly enough bud - I too take anxiety pills (Fluoxitine) which is a generic form of Prozac but before that I took Citlopram - which messed me up big time too. If you need to use it again - seriously check out fluoxitine, its helped me out a lot.

[CloeHokie]

Oddly enough bud - I too take anxiety pills (Fluoxitine) which is a generic form of Prozac but before that I took Citlopram - which messed me up big time too. If you need to use it again - seriously check out fluoxitine, its helped me out a lot.

I was having a tough time with a friend I lost in Iraq and school at the time. The Zoloft made it worse but I got a great book my doc gave me and it helped me deal with the panic attacks I was having. I have since heard bad things about Zoloft as well so Im not sure they gave me the right meds in the first place! :lol:

[BANJAXED]

I was having a tough time with a friend I lost in Iraq and school at the time. The Zoloft made it worse but I got a great book my doc gave me and it helped me deal with the panic attacks I was having. I have since heard bad things about Zoloft as well so Im not sure they gave me the right meds in the first place! :lol:

No kidding, I haven't either! I'm really surprised by some doctors and their ability to attain and keep a license. Glad to hear you're doing and feeling better. :Clap:

[EatonFan]

The reason why people don't buy it is because they can't afford it, not because they're lazy. Are you saying a recently laid off autoworker who has to feed a family of four is lazy because he can't buy Health Insurance? Are you saying the nearly 15 million hardworking Middle Class families without coverage are lazy because they can't afford it?

Just because someone hasn't been blessed with the financial security you have doesn't mean they're lazy.

And you say you don't want your "hard earned cash" being taken to pay for other people?

http://www.mikhaela.net/pictures/toons/boil071025schipveto.gif

My hard earned money should not be used to help someone too lazy to prevent a house fire. <_<

Actually fire departments should be funded by insurance carriers. They benefit the most by fire departments...

So... Eleden. What should be provided to every citizen without having every citizen pay? Healthcare? Childcare? Social Security? Medicare? Cable TV? YMCA membership? Welfare? Disability? Education? College Degree? What level of work do I have to attain to get everything free?

[CloeHokie]

Actually fire departments should be funded by insurance carriers. They benefit the most by fire departments...

So... Eleden. What should be provided to every citizen without having every citizen pay? Healthcare? Childcare? Social Security? Medicare? Cable TV? YMCA membership? Welfare? Disability? What level of work do I have to attain to get everything free?

Come on. You know you are stretching with that one.

I think We should have to pay for health care but it should be made affordable to all.

But I want free TV too! :lol:

[BANJAXED]

Actually fire departments should be funded by insurance carriers. They benefit the most by fire departments...
So... Eleden. What should be provided to every citizen without having every citizen pay? Healthcare? Childcare? Social Security? Medicare? Cable TV? YMCA membership? Welfare? Disability? What level of work do I have to attain to get everything free?

what? :huh:

[EatonFan]

Quote:
Originally Posted by EatonFan http://boards.bengals.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://boards.bengals.com/showthread.php?p=470873#post470873)
Actually fire departments should be funded by insurance carriers. They benefit the most by fire departments...
So... Eleden. What should be provided to every citizen without having every citizen pay? Healthcare? Childcare? Social Security? Medicare? Cable TV? YMCA membership? Welfare? Disability? What level of work do I have to attain to get everything free?


what? :huh:

Think about it. If the house that you are insuring is on fire, wouldn't you like to be the one backing/training the fire department? By enlarge, fire departments save lives (again if you are the insurer and you have a life policy on that guy, that's a big benefit to you) and limit damage (if you're the insurer then you benefit by reduced damage... less claims).

[EatonFan]

Come on. You know you are stretching with that one.

I think We should have to pay for health care but it should be made affordable to all.

But I want free TV too! :lol:

What is affordable to you, is not to someone else. So who's to say what is and is not affordable. Perhaps I think it's affordable now. How do you propose we make it affordable? What steps would you take?

[Eleden]

Actually fire departments should be funded by insurance carriers. They benefit the most by fire departments...

So... Eleden. What should be provided to every citizen without having every citizen pay? Healthcare? Childcare? Social Security? Medicare? Cable TV? YMCA membership? Welfare? Disability? Education? College Degree? What level of work do I have to attain to get everything free?

Please point out where I said we should get everything free. I didn't realize Cable TV was comparable to insurance that saves lives. <_<

[EatonFan]

Please point out where I said we should get everything free. I didn't realize Cable TV was comparable to insurance that saves lives. <_<

Everything on that list (yes, even the Cable TV) has been proposed in Congress as a government benefit. (The YMCA does it on their own).

Well, if it's not free to the lower class, then how much do they pay? I'll pose the same question to you: What is affordable?

[BANJAXED]

Quote:
Originally Posted by EatonFan http://boards.bengals.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://boards.bengals.com/showthread.php?p=470873#post470873)
Actually fire departments should be funded by insurance carriers. They benefit the most by fire departments...
So... Eleden. What should be provided to every citizen without having every citizen pay? Healthcare? Childcare? Social Security? Medicare? Cable TV? YMCA membership? Welfare? Disability? What level of work do I have to attain to get everything free?




Think about it. If the house that you are insuring is on fire, wouldn't you like to be the one backing/training the fire department? By enlarge, fire departments save lives (again if you are the insurer and you have a life policy on that guy, that's a big benefit to you) and limit damage (if you're the insurer then you benefit by reduced damage... less claims).

I see what you're saying but life insurance is night and day when compared to P&C tho. You may never need to use P&C and the less you do the cheaper it is for you (car insurance?) not the same for life insurance - eventually it will get paid out one way or another (cause everyone dies last time I checked) - the main difference is the level of risk.

[EatonFan]

To pose the question differently: If I'm making $9.00/hour and am working full time. What government benefits should I be entitled to receive for free or for a nominal amount?

[CloeHokie]

What is affordable to you, is not to someone else. So who's to say what is and is not affordable. Perhaps I think it's affordable now. How do you propose we make it affordable? What steps would you take?

Make it affordable to the common man. My company pays for mine now. I dont have all the answers but it seems to me if we quit wasting money on pointless Wars and silly missions in space we could have plenty of ways to make it affordable to everyone.

[EatonFan]

I see what you're saying but life insurance is night and day when compared to P&C tho. You may never need to use P&C and the less you do the cheaper it is for you (car insurance?) not the same for life insurance - eventually it will get paid out one way or another (cause everyone dies last time I checked)

But not everyone pays the premium out all the way through to the end of the policy. For instance, a term policy of 25 years may go up so substantially that the person can no longer afford the premium and therefore, the policy lapses and the insured dies. No benefits paid. The insured paid a premium for 25 years and got no benefit.
You think that doesn't happen?

[EatonFan]

Make it affordable to the common man. My company pays for mine now. I dont have all the answers but it seems to me if we quit wasting money on pointless Wars and silly missions in space we could have plenty of ways to make it affordable to everyone.

Then your answer is no answer.

[CloeHokie]

EatonFan I am having a hard time reading your posts. I keep scrolling down to the bottom to see your sig! :wub:

[EatonFan]

I posted several in depth posts, but there were no replies. So, I stopped. Guess ignorance is bliss.... <_<

[BANJAXED]

But not everyone pays the premium out all the way through to the end of the policy. For instance, a term policy of 25 years may go up so substantially that the person can no longer afford the premium and therefore, the policy lapses and the insured dies. No benefits paid. The insured paid a premium for 25 years and got no benefit.
You think that doesn't happen?

No I know that does happen - that's why I dont have term! B)

either way its not the insurance companies loss - they are just trying to cover their butts weighing the morbidity rates and whatever pre-ex's the person might have. it's not their issue when that person can no longer pay the premiums? they should have been responsible and bought life insurance at a young age to lock in their rates and insurability. Now a days you can convert term to perm without health questions.

[EatonFan]

EatonFan I am having a hard time reading your posts. I keep scrolling down to the bottom to see your sig! :wub:

She was the hottest cheerleader on our squad last year IMO. :wub:

[CloeHokie]

Then your answer is no answer.

Uh? I just said if we stop wasting money in other areas we can use it to provide an affordable health care for all. Im sure some people will still not be able to pay for it but thanks for the reply.

[EatonFan]

No I know that does happen - that's why I dont have term! B)

Then you really are paying through the nose with a whole life policy? OUCH. Tell me at least you have a universal life policy!

[CloeHokie]

I posted several in depth posts, but there were no replies. So, I stopped. Guess ignorance is bliss.... <_<

I saw them but was in my own battle at the time. Im leaving for vacation now but I know you are the best member to talk to when I get back! Your knowledge of this area is way better than mine and Im looking forward to picking your brain when I get back. :thumbsup:

[EatonFan]

Uh? I just said if we stop wasting money in other areas we can use it to provide an affordable health care for all. Im sure some people will still not be able to pay for it but thanks for the reply.

Easy to state. Hard to implement. Yes. Iraq's government needs to step to the financial table... NOW. If not the financial table, then at least pump some more oil or give us a freakin' discount!!!

The NASA missions are cool and provide us with excellent technology. Leave it alone! :p

[BANJAXED]

I posted several in depth posts, but there were no replies. So, I stopped. Guess ignorance is bliss.... <_<

I replied? :wacko:

[EatonFan]

I replied? :wacko:

... and so you did. Kudos to you. :thumbsup:

[CloeHokie]

Easy to state. Hard to implement. Yes. Iraq's government needs to step to the financial table... NOW. If not the financial table, then at least pump some more oil or give us a freakin' discount!!!

The NASA missions are cool and provide us with excellent technology. Leave it alone! :p

Lol, some Nasa missions yes. But we waste a lot of money on some silly ones that do nothing for us IMO. You know how much oil we use to get a rocket up? Its rediculous.

Anyway guys I'm leaving for a week! Have a good weekend. See ya! :thumbsup:

[BANJAXED]

Then you really are paying through the nose with a whole life policy? OUCH. Tell me at least you have a universal life policy!

No sir - I have great rates. Whole life is the way to go IMO - my policy gets 7% return each year with no fluctuation. It's all about the company you go with. :smirk:

The one I do - I can convert my remaining term to whole life without answering any health questions. So I will be able to attain lifetime coverage.

I don't feel bad for people who can't get life insurance - they should've been responsible enough to get it while they were young. The increasing rates are just the insurance company coverage their morbidity risk (along with other factors).

[EatonFan]

No sir - I have great rates. Whole life is the way to go IMO - my policy gets 7% return each year with no fluctuation. It's all about the company you go with. :smirk:

The one I do - I can convert my remaining term to whole life without answering any health questions. So I will be able to attain lifetime coverage.

I don't feel bad for people who can't get life insurance - they should've been responsible enough to get it while they were young. The increasing rates are just the insurance company coverage their morbidity risk (along with other factors).

And if you die, how much do your heirs get? Face of the policy? OR Face plus the little savings account inside? (My guess is face value.) Which means that that extra you are paying in to have this savings account, will go for naught. :scared2:

[BANJAXED]

And if you die, how much do your heirs get? Face of the policy? OR Face plus the little savings account inside? (My guess is face value.) Which means that that extra you are paying in to have this savings account, will go for naught. :scared2:

Nope. You're guess was incorrect. Again, its all about the company you go with.

[EatonFan]

Nope. You're guess was incorrect. Again, its all about the company you go with.

http://www.practicalmoneyskills.com/english/at_home/life_events/baby/future.php

Might want to check your policy and read the last paragraph of this article.

[BANJAXED]

http://www.practicalmoneyskills.com/english/at_home/life_events/baby/future.php

Might want to check your policy and read the last paragraph of this article.

That is true - unless you're cash value dividens have grown to outweigh the ammount of you're coverage. My life insurance cash value compounds to the point when it will actually adds to the amount of the face value. When I pass whatever the new compounded amount will be the amount paid out.

[xxlt]

First of all, you mentioned that Hannity does/says nothing right, phil asked for examples. The burden of proof doesn't lie with phil, it lies with you.

Secondly, do you honestly think these comments were simply made up and aired? Do you really think he committed slander on national television/radio/newspaper?

Wrong! I asked for Beck's documentation and to date philhos has provided none. The burden of proof is on him and to date he has provided none. So, as I originally pointed out, people are endorsing or debating Beck's - groundless, as far as we know - statements.

The Hannity issue is secondary. However, I did state that THE GREAT AND POWERFUL HANNITY makes things up. This is proven in the book "Lies and the Lyining Liars Who Tell Them" by Al Franken.

This is not a matter of you and phil agreeing with SH's opinions and me agreeing with AF's opinions. This is a matter of Hannity giving his opinion on various "facts" and then Franken proving with copious documentation that said "facts" are in reality just things that Hannity made up. Hannity is a liar, period end. I am suggesting that GB is possibly a similar liar. To date, I have no reason to believe otherwise.

Is it slander? Well, not if he isn't sued. Just like it isn't lying under oath if Bush is never subpoenaed about all the things he is lied about while not under oath.

[xxlt]

Hannity is on Fox News.

But it's a different set of circumstances to say "this guy went to a Muslim school" when in fact he didn't. That could simply be a case of misinformation or misinterpretation.

But to say a man said "................................" and that be completely untrue...is called slander. I can't see anyone doing that.

Interesting that "a man" allegedly said "..........."

"A man" who "invented the Canadian system." Well, since "a man" is generic and there probably isn't "a man" who "invented the Canadian system" it is not slander, it is just horse ****. This is precisely what I was pointing out, and what your gigantic brain still can't see. :hmm:

[xxlt]

I highly doubt you pay only $200 in taxes for healthcare.

According to Perotcharts you're around 8% of GDP so taxes equivalent would likely be $3000 for the average person in the UK. Here it may be $5000. If you are a very low wage earner, you may pay a lesser % than others who make more as I believe the UK to be a progressive system. Not sure of your system there. You may be atypical of the average UK'er, and I know you are if you only pay $200 in taxes for healthcare. You would then be living off the work of others to supplement your own healthcare coverage.

So you are saying Jamie pays $3,000 taxes plus $100 out of pocket plus no premiums. Here, someone paid $10,000 premiums plus an unidentified amount out of pocket plus an unidentified amount in taxes. And you think our system is better? Why? Jamie's total costs (for six trips to the doctor) of taxes plus premiums plus o/p = $3100. Here, the total cost (for five fewer doctor visits) is $10,000 plus taxes plus o/p. How is that better?!

[EatonFan]

So you are saying Jamie pays $3,000 taxes plus $100 out of pocket plus no premiums. Here, someone paid $10,000 premiums plus an unidentified amount out of pocket plus an unidentified amount in taxes. And you think our system is better? Why? Jamie's total costs (for six trips to the doctor) of taxes plus premiums plus o/p = $3100. Here, the total cost (for five fewer doctor visits) is $10,000 plus taxes plus o/p. How is that better?!

Didn't say it was better... I just said it wasn't an apples to apples comparison like Jamie was leading us to believe. His "healthcare premium" is in the form of taxes. And the $3,000 figure is just a guess based upon % of GDP which isn't true for all people. Most people pay at least $300 per month for decent health insurance in the U.S. and for my father who finally turned 65 and is going on medicare, the cost was $699 per month. His supplemental policy will be only $118.

(Note: Also the $10,000 was paid over 12 years... not 1 year)

[xxlt]

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/kfiles/b91585.html

In response to a challenge to "find where I said anything that was not true" issued by Hannity, the 15 examples above were gathered in one day of research by one person!

When you google "Sean Hannity lies" you get 436,000 results.

By comparison when you google CNN lies you get 284,000 results; CBS News lies 964,000 results; Fox News Lies 3,290,000 results; PBS News lies 174,000 results.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2007/060907_hannity_lies.htm

A "trivial" but typical Hannity lie about Ron Paul/his supporters is in the above the link.

One observer noted 'Hannity commits slander on an ongoing basis,' in his assessment. That is an opinion statement, but I believe one that is valid.

[xxlt]

http://mediamatters.org/items/200806130007?f=s_search

And, here is an example of a Hannity lie (actually several lies) from this month, June 2008.

It took about 10 seconds to find this.

[xxlt]

Didn't say it was better... I just said it wasn't an apples to apples comparison like Jamie was leading us to believe. His "healthcare premium" is in the form of taxes. And the $3,000 figure is just a guess based upon % of GDP which isn't true for all people. Most people pay at least $300 per month for decent health insurance in the U.S. and for my father who finally turned 65 and is going on medicare, the cost was $699 per month. His supplemental policy will be only $118.

(Note: Also the $10,000 was paid over 12 years... not 1 year)

I realized the "note" errorr after I hit enter and figured someone would correct that soon enough. (Sorry, it was not intentional.)

I was trying to make a more "apples to apples comparison" out of the numbers you provided. It still seems to me that the English system is a better way. Of course, the insurance companies will spend a lot of money to try to convince me and everyone else otherwise. Wonder where they will get all that money?

[xxlt]

http://mediamatters.org/items/200805220002?f=s_search

And just for good measure, there is one more Hannity lie.

[EatonFan]

I realized the "note" errorr after I hit enter and figured someone would correct that soon enough. (Sorry, it was not intentional.)

I was trying to make a more "apples to apples comparison" out of the numbers you provided. It still seems to me that the English system is a better way. Of course, the insurance companies will spend a lot of money to try to convince me and everyone else otherwise. Wonder where they will get all that money?

There is certainly a lot of waste in the private sector in this industry. 17% admin vs. 8% admin for Medicare is staggering. See my Healthcare I, II, & III posts to get the idea (earlier in this thread). We just need to standardize and streamline the system and we'd be a lot better off.

[xxlt]

There is certainly a lot of waste in the private sector in this industry. 17% admin vs. 8% admin for Medicare is staggering. See my Healthcare I, II, & III posts to get the idea (earlier in this thread). We just need to standardize and streamline the system and we'd be a lot better off.

So are you suggesting privatizing Medicare or nationalizing Healthcare?

[HearUsRoar]

Wrong! I asked for Beck's documentation and to date philhos has provided none. The burden of proof is on him and to date he has provided none. So, as I originally pointed out, people are endorsing or debating Beck's - groundless, as far as we know - statements.

The Hannity issue is secondary. However, I did state that THE GREAT AND POWERFUL HANNITY makes things up. This is proven in the book "Lies and the Lyining Liars Who Tell Them" by Al Franken.

This is not a matter of you and phil agreeing with SH's opinions and me agreeing with AF's opinions. This is a matter of Hannity giving his opinion on various "facts" and then Franken proving with copious documentation that said "facts" are in reality just things that Hannity made up. Hannity is a liar, period end. I am suggesting that GB is possibly a similar liar. To date, I have no reason to believe otherwise.

Is it slander? Well, not if he isn't sued. Just like it isn't lying under oath if Bush is never subpoenaed about all the things he is lied about while not under oath.


I said the burden of proof lies with you regarding Hannity being wrong about so many things.

So your response is to say that Hannity was proven wrong and proven to make things up in Al Franken's book Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them. Really? Care to expound?

I don't think you do, because the "lies" that Franken has come up with are about as lame as his comedy.

Here's a site that pretty much sums up how I feel on Franken v. Hannity.

http://planetfranken.tripod.com/seanhannity.html

Oh, and for the record, yes, I've actually read Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them and Let Freedom Ring. This isn't a case of me regurgitating something that sounds good simply to "support the right."

[Ghostwriter]

Glenn Beck's take on national health care from his radio show, yesterday. http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/11886/

Note: I edited out only the parts that don't talk about health care and extraneous talk (like 'um's and 'ah's).


From that point on he starts talking about socialism, the old left vs. the new left, etc.

So, do you agree, disagree?

Considering the success rate of other government programs, I say leave it in private hands.

[xxlt]

I said the burden of proof lies with you regarding Hannity being wrong about so many things.

So your response is to say that Hannity was proven wrong and proven to make things up in Al Franken's book Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them. Really? Care to expound?

I don't think you do, because the "lies" that Franken has come up with are about as lame as his comedy.

Here's a site that pretty much sums up how I feel on Franken v. Hannity.

http://planetfranken.tripod.com/seanhannity.html

Oh, and for the record, yes, I've actually read Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them and Let Freedom Ring. This isn't a case of me regurgitating something that sounds good simply to "support the right."

You don't think Franken is funny, therefore Hannity isn't a liar? O.K.

And, actually I did expound on the lies of Hannity in my other four posts after the Franken post. I guess they are invalidated by virtue of you ignoring them. It's magic!

[xxlt]

Considering the success rate of other government programs, I say leave it in private hands.

Yeah, the government ***** ***. Let's bring home our ****ty soldiers right now and privatize the war in Iraq. Mercenaries would do a much better job than our lousy government employees who seem to excel only at getting themselves killed. Privatize the military!:sarcasm:

[tbone77]

Public healthcare is only plausible today because big corporations in teh U.S. are finally starting to lobby for it. They can't afford to pay private insurance companies for employees anymore, so they want another option. Government administered healthcare will be very basic, but it could be cheaper than private healthcare. That's the only reason the big corps are interested in it, and the government is considering it.

Higher co-payments would help solve the shortage problems in Canada. And private insurance and doctors will always be available in the U.S. for people who can afford them. France is a better model than Canada, but the U.S. public healthcare system would be even less generous than France.

Personally, I've never met a doctor or health care agent who cares more about me (or my ill mother) than they did about their vacation home, their kids' college tuition, etc. I feel like a cow at the doctor's office. Most of them just want to perform expensive tests and prescribe a designer drug or two. It must be nice to monopolize drugs.

I will take care of myself. If I'm ever terminally ill, take me out to a remote location, leave me some food and drink and a sleeping net, and say farewell. If I make it back great. If not it was nice knowing you. Just don't leave me in some hospital.

If nothing else public healthcare would leave us with less spending money to make awful foreign policy decisions.

[EatonFan]

So are you suggesting privatizing Medicare or nationalizing Healthcare?

Medicare stays the way it is. It's a decently run system. (It has a good amount of fraud in it, but still a decent system. IMO) Healthcare would stay under the private system, but be funded by various means. If you are working, eventually 80% would be funded by your employer. 20% by you. The other half (46%) is already funded by the government through several programs.

The more people you have in the healthcare insurance pool, the better the rates will become for all of us. The reason why health providers have to charge exhorbitant amounts is because of their ridiculous unpaid/uncollectable accounts. Half of all bankruptcies are medical related. If we could just get more into the pool, the medical providers would be paid. Bankruptcies would fall. The amounts medical providers charge would fall or become stagnant. Economics 201.

[xxlt]

Medicare stays the way it is. It's a decently run system. (It has a good amount of fraud in it, but still a decent system. IMO) Healthcare would stay under the private system, but be funded by various means. If you are working, eventually 80% would be funded by your employer. 20% by you. The other half (46%) is already funded by the government through several programs.

The more people you have in the healthcare insurance pool, the better the rates will become for all of us. The reason why health providers have to charge exhorbitant amounts is because of their ridiculous unpaid/uncollectable accounts. Half of all bankruptcies are medical related. If we could just get more into the pool, the medical providers would be paid. Bankruptcies would fall. The amounts medical providers charge would fall or become stagnant. Economics 201.

I didn't take the 201 class. I also didn't take the 501 class. I have a feeling that certain realities from the 501 class (as well as Psychology 101) would expose the Economics 201 theory as wishful thinking. Don't get me wrong, I see your logic and want you to be right, I just don't think it is that simple.

Since you dared to say the government has (at least) one decent program in Medicare prepare to be blasted by the anti-government crowd who (strangely) in some cases believe the only thing that has kept the government from destroying America already is that George W. (which stands for "Whatever Jesus tells me to do I do it because he picked me to be President") Bush is God's tool of protection. On the bright side, this does mean that we can all agree on something - Bush is a tool. It is what sort of tool he is that we disagree on.

[HearUsRoar]

You don't think Franken is funny, therefore Hannity isn't a liar? O.K.

And, actually I did expound on the lies of Hannity in my other four posts after the Franken post. I guess they are invalidated by virtue of you ignoring them. It's magic!

I would resort to quirky little punchlines too if I had nothing else to stand on.

[HearUsRoar]

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/kfiles/b91585.html

In response to a challenge to "find where I said anything that was not true" issued by Hannity, the 15 examples above were gathered in one day of research by one person!

When you google "Sean Hannity lies" you get 436,000 results.

By comparison when you google CNN lies you get 284,000 results; CBS News lies 964,000 results; Fox News Lies 3,290,000 results; PBS News lies 174,000 results.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2007/060907_hannity_lies.htm

A "trivial" but typical Hannity lie about Ron Paul/his supporters is in the above the link.

One observer noted 'Hannity commits slander on an ongoing basis,' in his assessment. That is an opinion statement, but I believe one that is valid.

When you Google Sean Hannity lies you get 436,000 results? Interesting.

When you Google Al Franken lies you get 567,000 results. I gues this means Al Franken lies more?

Since it's obviously a very scientific way to prove something? :rolleyes:

Oh, and for the record, I don't like how Hannity handled the Ron Paul segment, but I think more of that falls on Fox News than just one man.

[Eleden]

Back on track with Nationalized Health Care.

I'm assuming that most of the individuals opposed to NHC are Republican. I'm also guessing they're fairly conservative individuals.

So to the people that fit the above description... if you're opposed to your "tax dollars" being spent on helping other Americans, why do you support spending a trillion of your "tax dollars" on a country thousands of miles away?

[HearUsRoar]

Back on track with Nationalized Health Care.

I'm assuming that most of the individuals opposed to NHC are Republican. I'm also guessing they're fairly conservative individuals.

So to the people that fit the above description... if you're opposed to your "tax dollars" being spent on helping other Americans, why do you support spending a trillion of your "tax dollars" on a country thousands of miles away?

What about those folk such as myself who are conservative and are opposed to NHC and think there are pros/cons to Iraq?

I think it's good Saddam is dead, but there are many other negatives surrounding it at the same time.

Very good question though.

[Eleden]

What about those folk such as myself who are conservative and are opposed to NHC and think there are pros/cons to Iraq?

I think it's good Saddam is dead, but there are many other negatives surrounding it at the same time.

Very good question though.

I think it's good Saddam's dead, but I think we've made the situation in Iraq far worse. It's now a breeding ground for terrorism and we're dumping loads of cash down the tubes trying to fix the mess we made.

I'm not speaking specifically to you when I say this, but I think it's hilarious when so called "budget hawks" veto children's health care funding... saying it's too expensive, then turn around and vote for a 150 billion dollar extension to the war.

[HearUsRoar]

I think it's good Saddam's dead, but I think we've made the situation in Iraq far worse. It's now a breeding ground for terrorism and we're dumping loads of cash down the tubes trying to fix the mess we made.

I'm not speaking specifically to you when I say this, but I think it's hilarious when so called "budget hawks" veto children's health care funding... saying it's too expensive, then turn around and vote for a 150 billion dollar extension to the war.

So do you think it's worse now than it was when Saddam was in power? Are do you mean since Saddam has died, at that moment in time, we've made it worse since then? Meaning if Saddam's death is the starting point have we regressed only since then or even before then?

I personally don't know enough about the children's health care funding to form an opinion but I imagine it would include helping children in any way/shape/form possible.

Also, I'm of the opinion we should be spending money on troops and ammo...just in a different country: Afghanistan.

[Eleden]

So do you think it's worse now than it was when Saddam was in power? Are do you mean since Saddam has died, at that moment in time, we've made it worse since then? Meaning if Saddam's death is the starting point have we regressed only since then or even before then?

I personally don't know enough about the children's health care funding to form an opinion but I imagine it would include helping children in any way/shape/form possible.

Also, I'm of the opinion we should be spending money on troops and ammo...just in a different country: Afghanistan.

I think the situation in Iraq is a lot worse than it was under Saddam. There's no doubt he was a terrible human being, but it seems like he was the only one capable of keeping his nation in one piece. By invading and destroying the infrastructure of Iraq we unleashed hundreds of years worth of ethnic conflict that had been suppressed under Hussein.

He never posed a threat to us so I have no idea why it was necessary to invade. I agree with you 100%, Afghanistan is where Bin Laden was stationed and it's where most of our cash should go.

[xxlt]

When you Google Sean Hannity lies you get 436,000 results? Interesting.

When you Google Al Franken lies you get 567,000 results. I gues this means Al Franken lies more?

Since it's obviously a very scientific way to prove something? :rolleyes:

Oh, and for the record, I don't like how Hannity handled the Ron Paul segment, but I think more of that falls on Fox News than just one man.

The objective of Googling "Hannity lies" was not to prove anything, merely to point out that I wasn't going to plow through 436,000 results to "prove" to you that he is more associated with lying than some entire news outlets, and at least half as much as others. (Doubtless Franken's numbers are skewed by the fact that he has written two books with the word "Lies" in the title.)

Funny to see you point the finger of blame at Fox News but exonerate their *****, Sean "Pure as the Driven Snow" Hannity. Why not just admit that while he might be an advocate for an ideology you in large part subscribe to that he is an embarrassment as a journalist and that he is as likely to make something up to serve his purpose as to present an argument based on facts?

[EatonFan]

I think it's good Saddam's dead, but I think we've made the situation in Iraq far worse. It's now a breeding ground for terrorism and we're dumping loads of cash down the tubes trying to fix the mess we made.

I'm not speaking specifically to you when I say this, but I think it's hilarious when so called "budget hawks" veto children's health care funding... saying it's too expensive, then turn around and vote for a 150 billion dollar extension to the war.

It was not a children's health care vote, as I understand it. They wanted to let adults in on the SCHips program. Those are not children. Now the 2nd edition did correct this and made improvements. http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.schip/index.html
(Bush wanted $5B more) I'd say the major sticking point now is that SChips would encourage people to leave private insurance in favor of the "free" SCHIPS program. Plus it included illegal immigrants. This is something I'm very much against is allowing illegals to get benefits from our government and they pay nothing in taxes and drive our wages down by being here. (I know there's consumer benefits, but those employers should be penalized severely. Either that or change our tax system so illegals pay some taxes.)

[EatonFan]

I think the situation in Iraq is a lot worse than it was under Saddam. There's no doubt he was a terrible human being, but it seems like he was the only one capable of keeping his nation in one piece. By invading and destroying the infrastructure of Iraq we unleashed hundreds of years worth of ethnic conflict that had been suppressed under Hussein.

He never posed a threat to us so I have no idea why it was necessary to invade. I agree with you 100%, Afghanistan is where Bin Laden was stationed and it's where most of our cash should go.

I don't know about worse. I'd say it's better, but not by leaps and bounds. Ultimately I think Iraq stays as one country and will eventually become a democracy. Sure, there's going to be violence. It may even be four score and seven years in the making...

[HearUsRoar]

The objective of Googling "Hannity lies" was not to prove anything, merely to point out that I wasn't going to plow through 436,000 results to "prove" to you that he is more associated with lying than some entire news outlets, and at least half as much as others. (Doubtless Franken's numbers are skewed by the fact that he has written two books with the word "Lies" in the title.)

Funny to see you point the finger of blame at Fox News but exonerate their *****, Sean "Pure as the Driven Snow" Hannity. Why not just admit that while he might be an advocate for an ideology you in large part subscribe to that he is an embarrassment as a journalist and that he is as likely to make something up to serve his purpose as to present an argument based on facts?

Nope, he's no more likely than Franken, sorry. And I didn't exonerate anyone. I admitted I didn't like the way he handled the Ron Paul segment, I just simply believe he wasn't alone in the matter. I assume he was given a story by the higher-ups and ran with it. Just the other day I heard him read something, then immediately say he didn't necessarilly agree with it. That to me sounds like someone who is apart of a station but doesn't let the station totally dictate what he says/believes. I like Ron Paul more than Sean Hannity so explain to me exactly what I have to gain by saying all this again?

Oh and by the way "liberals lie" turns up more hits than "conservatives lie" If that's not scientific data I don't know what it. :thumbsup:

[Eleden]

I don't know about worse. I'd say it's better, but not by leaps and bounds. Ultimately I think Iraq stays as one country and will eventually become a democracy. Sure, there's going to be violence. It may even be four score and seven years in the making...

I'd say the overall feeling in the nation is better... but the stability of Iraq is definitely worse.

Democracy is definitely possible but not until we somehow find a way to bring all the various minorities into a single coalition government.

Personally I liked Joe Biden's approach. He wanted to weaken the central government and divide the nation into three "states." Each state would function similar to that of our 50 seperate states. They could form their own laws to fit the demographics of their region while simultaneously following a few guidelines set up by the Iraqi Constitution. That way the minorities could be represented properly without the Shiites taking too much control over the government.

I'm hoping if Obama wins... he'll adopt this plan if Biden becomes Secretary of State.

[Eleden]

It was not a children's health care vote, as I understand it. They wanted to let adults in on the SCHips program. Those are not children. Now the 2nd edition did correct this and made improvements. http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.schip/index.html
(Bush wanted $5B more) I'd say the major sticking point now is that SChips would encourage people to leave private insurance in favor of the "free" SCHIPS program. Plus it included illegal immigrants. This is something I'm very much against is allowing illegals to get benefits from our government and they pay nothing in taxes and drive our wages down by being here. (I know there's consumer benefits, but those employers should be penalized severely. Either that or change our tax system so illegals pay some taxes.)

Congress fixed the bill by barring adults and non-US citizens from participating in the S-CHIP program... yet Bush still vetoed it. And no, people don't have the option of abandoning private insurance for S-CHIP because Congress placed income caps on the updated bill. The intentions of this bill was to allow more impoverished children to be covered with Health Insurance. I see no problem with that.

We've spent nearly a trillion dollars in Iraq... yet we can't spare 35 billion dollars to make sure our children have access to affordable health services?

[BANJAXED]

Considering the success rate of other government programs, I say leave it in private hands.

Exactly Ghost :Clap:

[jamiethelanky]

Considering the success rate of other government programs, I say leave it in private hands.
Or make the government better. See under fixing a broken finger by cutting your arm off.

[philhos]

Can you name something Hannity was right on?

Lots of things, but how about, since YOU are the one that brought him up and made claims about him, why don't you support your claims and state some of the things Hannity was wrong on?

As far as whether Beck offered a source, I went off the information at hand: 1. philhos is notorious for asking for sources when anyone "shares something" or argues a point 2. philhos said 'here's the transcript, sans unrelated stuff like throat clearing and stuff off topic' 3. there was no source in the "shared" portion. So, based on those three things I concluded that GB failed to substantiate his claim, possibly because he made it up.

I made a mental note that had it been something you disagreed with you would have pounced on the lack of a source and perhaps even suggested you didn't believe the claim. But, either since you agreed or thought GB above reproach, you didn't question it.

I'll give you that based on what was posted, it's reasonable to conclude that GB failed to substantiate his claim. But, you went beyond that. You didn't just question the lack of a source, you decided - probably because you disagree with him - that Glenn had to have made it up (and we're not even talking about the rest of what was posted). And that assumption was too much to make being based solely on the lack of a source provided.

I don't know if he made the statement up. You don't either. But, as you have pointed out in the past - since you brought it out for sharing it is on you to prove it. So, feel free to check the transcript out and find the source or feel free to have it assumed that Beck made up the whole thing.

For the record, Glenn didn't make it up.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=299282509335931
http://rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/06/founding_father_of_canadas_soc.php?comments=show
http://canadianmedicine.blogspot.com/2008/03/interview-claude-castonguay-quebec.html

In the minds of him, Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reilly (aka O' Liely) and their producers and employers this is acceptable practice because (pick one) a.) their job is to entertain b.) no one listening will question their authority c.) their job is to manipulate with information or, in the absence of it, misinformation d.) no one cares e.) all of the above.

You can read minds now, GA9, er xxlt? You know EXACTLY what these guys are thinking. Okay. <_<

a) You're right their job is to entertain, but their success doesn't come from lieing or making stuff up, it comes from the fact that more people agree with them than agree with, say, Al Franken.
b) Wrong. You obviously do not listen (or watch) any of their shows. Otherwise, you'd know there are plenty that question them.
c) Their job is to NOT manipulate anything. Their job is to give their commentary on the news of the day. Many people agree with them, some do not. And those that DO agree may not agree 100% of the time (I know there are times I've disagreed with them).

Besides, it's obvious to me that you do not listen to their shows. And trying to make these claims about them is EXACTLY the same as GA9 making the claims he does about Obama or Muslims in general.

So, to summarize, you offered an unsubstantiated set of quotes, and I asked for documentation. When I asked, you essentially admitted that they may or may not have been made up. Any argument you had offered was built on these statements that you admit may have been fabrications. Then you questioned my debating skills.

You hardly asked. You brought up a very valid point that there was no substantiation. But, instead of doing the right thing and leaving it at that, no you bash Beck, bring in Hannity (for some wierd reason) and then assert that Beck had to have made them up.

THAT'S why I questioned your debating skills.

BTW, I never offered an argument. I just provided some of Beck's arguments to generate a discussion on here.

Well, if it turns out anything Beck talked about has any basis in reality (and it is up to you to prove that it does since you brought it up - and that is your rule, not mine) I'll be happy to debate it. Until then, cheers!

I was gone all weekend, hence the lateness of this response, but see the links earlier in this thread, GA9, er xxlt. ;)

[xxlt]

Lots of things, but how about, since YOU are the one that brought him up and made claims about him, why don't you support your claims and state some of the things Hannity was wrong on?

Been there, done that, just for kicks - I guess you didn't read that part of the thread

I'll give you that based on what was posted, it's reasonable to conclude that GB failed to substantiate his claim. But, you went beyond that. You didn't just question the lack of a source, you decided - probably because you disagree with him - that Glenn had to have made it up (and we're not even talking about the rest of what was posted). And that assumption was too much to make being based solely on the lack of a source provided.

Suspicious of the lack of source, I merely pointed out that there is a lot of assertion without substantiation made by the t.v. talking heads. You seem quick to pounce on it yourself, generally. It is merely a phenomenon I pointed out. Don't take my word for it - go to FactCheck.org or MediaMatters websites and you will see much documentation of the phenomenon. But, I think you already know the phenomenon is a reality and don't need it "proven" to you.

For the record, Glenn didn't make