Obama lied about AARP Supporting Obamacare...and more

Status
Not open for further replies.
netrox said:
Shelby, let me remind you that Kokonut is regurigating everything he reads from right wing websites and never bother to read the entire text.

For example, death panel was never mentioned or even remotely close to it. The passage was about paying for procedures that deal with end of life situations and that is a COMMON procedure and something that ALL people should have... to avoid the Terri Schiavo-like incidents.

So much for their ignorance.
Click to expand...

Yep. I don't think Obama lied but he did gloss over it a bit. I remember thinking not necessarily when he said that on CNN. I didn't think it applied in all cases.
 
shel90 said:
Enter Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.), the Blue Dog Democrat who struck a deal with Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) to narrow the health care bill's scope and cost. Ross' amendment to the bill spends two of its 28 pages on the question of end-of-life care. Specifically, Ross makes it illegal for counselors to promote or list as an option suicide or assisted suicide. Ross also states that the counseling is optional, and that seeking counseling on a living will, for example, will not be interpreted by a hospital as declining full and aggressive treatment.

The House has not passed its health care reform bill yet, and the Senate Finance Committee has not voted on health care reform at all. But the language now in House's health care reform bill, specifically in the Ross amendment, does not promote euthanasia or assisted suicide. It prevents health care providers from discussing it.

Euthanasia and Reform: What is the Truth? -- Politics Daily


If you’ve been listening to all those Republican leaders spouting this nonsense and thinking “man, that sounds crazy”, there’s a good reason why. It’s because it is crazy. How can we tell? Because it is disturbingly similar to a line that has been pushed for a couple months now by an actual crazy person — political cult leader and full-on nutbar Lyndon LaRouche.

If you’re not familiar with him, LaRouche has been living on the American political fringe since the 1960s, first as an extreme Marxist, then reinventing himself in the 1980s as an extreme right-winger to capitalize on the popularity of Ronald Reagan.

Over all those years, though, LaRouche has been consistent in advancing some of the most downright crazy ideas ever introduced to American political discourse. Said crazy ideas include, but are not limited to:

The world is secretly run by the British Empire!
The international drug cartels are secretly run by Queen Elizabeth!
The Beatles weren’t a band, but a psychological warfare campaign by the British government!
Henry Kissinger was an agent for the KGB and the Trilateral Commission!
Vice President Dick Cheney was a puppet of British intelligence!
This spring’s swine flu outbreak was orchestrated by the World Wildlife Fund!
The anti-tax “tea party” movement is a creation of liberal billionaire George Soros — and popular social-networking site Twitter was created by Soros to control it!
It would almost be comical, if his little cult didn’t have a record of embezzling elderly people and exploiting impressionable young people — with one such young person even ending up dead after attempting to break away.
So why do I bring all this up? Because for months before Betsy McCaughey and the GOP started peddling the Big Lie that health care reform meant euthanasia, LaRouche was peddling the same thing.
Consider this statement from a LaRouche publication dated May 16:
Today, the looters are inside the White House, in the persons of Larry Summers, Peter Orszag, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, Nancy-Ann DeParle, and others. There, they are dictating how to continue the HMO looting rights, even to the point of death, under the banner of “saving money” by health-care “reform.” Citizens are receiving Hitler-era “reasons” for why they must accept drastic medical cutbacks, sickness, and death. For example, you must forego what is called “wasteful, excessive treatment,” during your end-of-life months.
President Obama has proclaimed this Nazi medicine/health “reform” his top goal. Congress, so far, is acting in lockstep, under the direction of Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), and Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), to whip up comprehensive reform legislation by this June.
Or this one, dated May 15:
“This is mass murder,” LaRouche said. “Obama has adopted Hitler’s program. There is no reason to hold one’s tongue. When the President of the United States has adopted Hitler’s program, that’s the time to unleash. This is exactly what I warned about on April 11th in my webcast. Obama has a Nero complex. Obama is the new Nero. This is exactly what is happening. This is Hitler’s policy now being echoed by Obama. Let’s not allow any compromise. You have to attack this directly. He has adopted Hitler’s genocidal health policy.”
The "Health Reform = Euthanasia" Lie: It Sounds Crazy Because It Is Crazy | CtW Connect


“AARP supports specific measures that would help older Americans and their families – including bipartisan proposals to create a new follow-up care benefit in Medicare that would help prevent hospital re-admissions, as well as to address the Medicare prescription drug coverage gap known as the ‘doughnut hole.’ We also support the need for lawmakers and the Administration to act this year to fix what doesn’t work in the health care system.

“We share the President’s commitment to act this year, and our members appreciate his insistence that any final reform package will not reduce Medicare benefits for the millions of people that literally depend on that program as a lifeline.

AARP Reacts to President?s Health Care Townhall
Click to expand...

I remember I voted for him once before I found out who he is. Lesson learned. :P I don't vote for anyone I don't know anything about anymore.
 
Reba said:
Liebling, did I miss your reply, or did you miss this question?

AllDeaf.com - View Single Post - Obama lied about AARP Supporting Obamacare...and more
Click to expand...

I´m sorry that I overlook your 1st question as I responsed your question over retirement which I thought it´s your first question but I didn´t see that healthcare, you questioned me is your first question.

Here is my answer to your question.

Reba said:
How much do you and your husband each pay for your monthly insurance premiums?
Click to expand...

It´s personal question but I have no problem to use the link "German Wage Tax Calculator" as an example to show you.

Lohn- und Einkommensteuerberechnung


It depends on its gross wage.

A husband pay €158.00 per month to health insurance company of his €2,000 gross wage.

A wife pay €118.50 per month to health insurance company of her €1,500 gross wage.

They put Tax Card IV because they both work and how many children they do have due tax.

No matter how many children do they have but €158.00 and €118.50 remain same to follow gross wage.

A single also pay €158 per month to health insurance company of his €2,000 gross wage as well but he have to put Tax Card I and 0 children due tax.

Children under healthcare are free up to 18 years old but the parents still pay €158.00 and €118.50 when their adult children got job and have their own tax card.

I hope you get what I am trying to explain. If not, no problem I will explain again.



P.S. I check with my month paid including Tax Free Allowance to compare with link of German Wage Tax Calculator. All of social insurances I paid is correct except both taxes. I paid €75 less of both taxes to compare with the link.

Nursing Caring insurance is an accurate word, not Disablitiy Insurance.

 
The more you lie...the more your rep drops.

I don't think it is something Obama would do and if he really wants to prove that he's a good president, then he gotta be honest to god with his words.

So far...all of this you are telling us is a misunderstanding. He didn't lie. He just inaccurate, is all.
 
Steel X said:
The more you lie...the more your rep drops.

I don't think it is something Obama would do and if he really wants to prove that he's a good president, then he gotta be honest to god with his words.

So far...all of this you are telling us is a misunderstanding. He didn't lie. He just inaccurate, is all.
Click to expand...

Yes I am thinking the same.
 
Liebling:-))) said:
It´s personal question but I have no problem to use the link "German Wage Tax Calculator" as an example to show you....
Click to expand...
Yes, it is personal but you said you would be happy to answer our questions about German health care. Also, I answered your personal questions about my dental costs, so I thought you wouldn't mind a fair question about your costs.

I want to know how much the monthly costs are so I can compare what we pay now.

Also, you did say before that you can choose which insurance company that you use. If Obama's plan passes with the public option, people might not get a choice. If Germany's plan didn't allow a choice for insurance, would you agree with that?

It's very hard to compare Germany, England or Canada with the USA. The plans are not the same.
 
Steel X said:
The more you lie...the more your rep drops.

I don't think it is something Obama would do and if he really wants to prove that he's a good president, then he gotta be honest to god with his words.

So far...all of this you are telling us is a misunderstanding. He didn't lie. He just inaccurate, is all.
Click to expand...
Just like former President Bush, right?
 
Liebling:-))) said:
It´s personal question but I have no problem to use the link "German Wage Tax Calculator" as an example to show you.

Lohn- und Einkommensteuerberechnung

It depends on its gross wage.

A husband pay €158.00 per month to health insurance company of his €2,000 gross wage.

A wife pay €118.50 per month to health insurance company of her €1,500 gross wage.

They put Tax Card IV because they both work and how many children they do have due tax.

No matter how many children do they have but €158.00 and €118.50 remain same to follow gross wage.

A single also pay €158 per month to health insurance company of his €2,000 gross wage as well but he have to put Tax Card I and 0 children due tax.

Children under healthcare are free up to 18 years old but the parents still pay €158.00 and €118.50 when their adult children got job and have their own tax card.

I hope you get what I am trying to explain. If not, no problem I will explain again.


P.S. I check with my month paid including Tax Free Allowance to compare with link of German Wage Tax Calculator. All of social insurances I paid is correct except both taxes. I paid €75 less of both taxes to compare with the link.

Nursing Caring insurance is an accurate word, not Disablitiy Insurance.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the information. It gives me an idea of how much insurance costs in other countries.

According to your example, in US dollars, a couple jointly earning $5,015 monthly would pay $395 monthly for health insurance.

Our Tricare has a deductible of $500 per year for our family, so that wouldn't be a bargain for us. If we don't use our Tricare we pay nothing that year.
 
Ah. The old "Bush lied" meme that's been circulating ad nauseum.
 
Real Choice? It’s Off Limits in Health Bills
Consider the following health insurance plan.

It refuses to pay for certain medical care and then doesn’t offer a clear explanation. It does pay for unhelpful care that ends up raising premiums. Its customer service can be hard to reach or unhelpful. And the people who are covered by this insurer have no choice but to remain with it — or, at best, to choose from one or two other insurers that are about as bad.

In all likelihood, I have just described your insurance plan.

Health insurers often act like monopolies — like a cable company or the Department of Motor Vehicles — because they resemble monopolies. Consumers, instead of being able to choose freely among insurers, are restricted to the plans their employer offers. So insurers are spared the rigors of true competition, and they end up with high costs and spotty service.

Americans give lower marks to their health insurer than they do to their life insurer, their auto insurer or their bank, according to the American Customer Satisfaction Index. Even the Postal Service gets better marks. (Cable companies, however, get worse ones.) No wonder President Obama’s favorite villain is health insurers.

You might think, then, that a central goal of health reform would be to offer people more choice. But it isn’t.

Real choice is not part of the bills moving through the Democratic-led Congress; even if the much-debated government-run insurance plan was created, it would not be available to most people who already have coverage. Republicans, meanwhile, have shown no interest in making insurance choice part of a compromise they could accept. Both parties are protecting the insurers.

That’s a reflection of the thorny politics of health care. On one hand, big interest groups are lobbying hard to keep some form of the status quo. Insurers don’t want people to have more choice. Neither do employers and labor unions, which now control huge piles of money spent on health care. Nor do hospitals and drug makers, which benefit from all the waste now in the system.

On the other hand, the people who stand to benefit most from having more choice — all of us — are not agitating for change, because the costs of the system are hidden from us. A typical household spends $15,000 each year on health care. But most of it comes in the form of taxes or employer deductions from paychecks, which means insurance can seem practically free.

As a result, people may not like their insurer, but they don’t hate it, either. If anything, they are more anxious about losing their insurance than they are eager to be given more choice. And that anxiety has driven the White House’s decision to pursue a fairly conservative form of health reform.

To be clear, the versions of reform now floating around Congress would do a lot of good. They would make it far easier for people without an employer plan to get health insurance and would make some modest attempts to nudge the health system away from its perverse fee-for-service model.

Yet they would not improve most people’s health care anytime soon. Giving people more control over their own care would. White House advisers, however, decided against that option long ago. They worried that opening up the insurance market would destabilize employer-provided insurance and make Mr. Obama’s plan vulnerable to the same criticism that undid Bill Clinton’s: that it was too radical.

They may well have been right. Then again, given all the flak they have been taking anyway, they may have been wrong.

•

The best-known proposal for giving people more choice is the Wyden-Bennett bill, named for Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, and Robert Bennett, a Utah Republican, who introduced it in the Senate in 2007. There are other broadly similar versions of the idea, too. One comes from Victor Fuchs, a Stanford professor sometimes called the dean of health economists, and Ezekiel Emanuel, an oncologist and an Obama health-policy adviser.

In the simplest version, families would receive a voucher worth as much as their employer spends on their health insurance. They would then buy an insurance plan on an “exchange” where insurers would compete for their business. The government would regulate this exchange. Insurers would be required to offer basic benefits, and insurers that attracted a sicker group of patients would be subsidized by those that attracted a healthier group.

The immediate advantage would be that people could choose a plan that fit their own preferences, rather than having to accept a plan chosen by human resources. You would be able to carry your plan from one job to the next — or hold onto it if you found yourself unemployed. You would never have to switch doctors because your employer switched insurance plans.

The longer-term advantage would be that health insurance would become fully subject to the brutal and wonderful forces of the market. Insurers that offered better plans — plans that drew on places like the Mayo Clinic to offer good, lower-cost care — would win more customers.

“That’s the way the rest of the economy works,” says William Lewis, former director of the McKinsey Global Institute.

Politically, though, the full voucher plan is still too radical, which is why the Wyden-Bennett bill has attracted support from only 13 other senators — four Republicans, eight Democrats and Joe Lieberman. So Mr. Wyden has come up with a narrower version.

It expands the exchange that Democratic leaders are already planning to create for the uninsured so that many more people would be allowed to use it. (If the exchange were limited to the uninsured, any government-run insurance plan, a crucial part of reform for many liberals, would not be available to most people.) But Mr. Wyden isn’t having much luck with this idea, either. The support for the employer-based system is simply too strong.

And the defenders of the employer system have some legitimate arguments. An insurance exchange may end up having some of the same pitfalls as 401(k) plans, in which some workers make poor choices. Having employers navigate the complex landscape of insurance, the defenders say, may be better for employees.

Here’s what I would ask those defenders, however: Given all the problems with health care — the high costs and decidedly mixed results — how comfortable are you defending the status quo? Why force people into a system you think is better for them?

If people were instead allowed to choose, all but a small percentage might indeed stick with their employer plan. In that case, a Wyden-like proposal wouldn’t amount to much. It certainly would not destabilize the employer-provided insurance system.

Then again, if lots of families did switch to a plan on the exchange, the impact would be quite different. With fewer employees signing up for on-the-job insurance, companies might shrink their benefits departments. The number of companies offering insurance would keep dropping. The employer insurance system could begin to crumble.

But wouldn’t that be precisely the fate that the system deserved?
Click to expand...
 
Reba said:
Yes, it is personal but you said you would be happy to answer our questions about German health care. Also, I answered your personal questions about my dental costs, so I thought you wouldn't mind a fair question about your costs.

I want to know how much the monthly costs are so I can compare what we pay now.
Click to expand...

Yes, I have no problem for ask any question about German healthcare system and explain why it´s personal question because the amount I paid to follow % of my monthly gross wage and use the link of gross wage as an example.

I will be happy to answer your question how much I pay any surgery out of my pocket if the cost, my healthcare insurance reject to cover.

Also, you did say before that you can choose which insurance company that you use.
Click to expand...

Yes, that´s right. All insurance company for healthcare is unlimited but they have different offers.

If Obama's plan passes with the public option, people might not get a choice. If Germany's plan didn't allow a choice for insurance, would you agree with that?
Click to expand...

Well, I have no opinion on this since I experienced both healthcare system in UK and Germany. I was born and raised in UK and can choose any doctors, I like to see. Yes, I don´t have any choice for public health insurance in UK except private insurance. I never thought about this but satisfy what kind of treatment I received in UK when I think of US healthcare system. Yes I know about US healthcare system for a long time because I have Aunt who married an American and live in Florida... She came to UK to have her dental done and surgery. That´s how I learn from her.

I only had a bad experience once in my life is over 2 years waiting list for tonsil removal in UK.

In Germany, I have choice for any healthcare company what I like. I don´t have any bad experiences like waiting list...

I really have no opinion on this but I personally disagree to pay both taxes to Obama´s healthcare reform and medicare/medicaid/Tricare

See the example of Jillio´s post.

AllDeaf.com - View Single Post - Obama supporters?

My opinion to rid medicare/medicaid/trica to set public healthcare reform for everyone.... then you pay tax for healthcare insurance. Those people who experience war, etc, get veteran pension.


It's very hard to compare Germany, England or Canada with the USA. The plans are not the same.
Click to expand...

Yes, it´s very complication to compare the USA with other countries. I need to know how many % Americans should pay if Obama set the healthcare reform for everyone. There´re many confusion thru medias.... One says, want adopt Canada´s healthcare, other one says, want German healthcare, other one says, want UK healthcare... Very confusion... I really don´t know what Obama plan for healthcare reform if he do not adopt any country´s healthcare to set healthcare for everyone in the USA... because many Americans refused to give Obama the chance to explain what he plan... how many %... all what they do is shout, call nasty names, etc. Why can´t they learn to be patience and TRY to listen... then we will know more... One thing, we don´t understand because we thought Americans know Obama is for healthcare reform like what some of all presidents tried and fail with healthcare in the past.

The link of world comparison salary, I posted to response Barbaro´s post. They do have US Wage Tax Calculator if you click US salary then you can see US Wage Tax Calculator bottom of US salary.
Click to expand...
 
Reba said:
Thank you for the information. It gives me an idea of how much insurance costs in other countries.

According to your example, in US dollars, a couple jointly earning $5,015 monthly would pay $395 monthly for health insurance.

Our Tricare has a deductible of $500 per year for our family, so that wouldn't be a bargain for us. If we don't use our Tricare we pay nothing that year.
Click to expand...

Welcome :)

I will be back for response your post later.
 
so my brother's home from London after living there for a year. He just told me that he has a torn ACL on his left knee. i asked why don't he get it fixed in UK. He said that UK health care was absolutely horrifying and the doctor diagnosed it as a bad sprain or something.

His colleague had a torn ACL too and the British doctor checked him out in a short time and said - "nothing's wrong with your knee. just a bad sprain. you'll be fine." Not even a MRI scan or anything to rule anything out. He came home (America) for christmas and then went to see a specialist. turned out that it was a torn ACL and then he had a surgery immediately.

To schedule for MRI scan, my brother would have to wait 3-4+ months. He decided to stick it out to have it done here in USA. He's gotta see doctor and all... and that can be done quickly.... something that average British citizens do not have a privilege of under government-run health care.

and no we're not going to lose a house over this in America :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top