Will you be too fat to insure?

[natisha]

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4285049/government-to-track-your-bmi?playlist_id=86912

There can be only one reason for this. The Gov. does plan to limit/tax/punish those they deem to be not of ideal weight in their opinion. Why else would they care? What about all their talk about existing conditions not mattering?

[FredRock]

What the man was saying was right. If we're going to sit there and tell every person deemed fat that they need to do different things to save us money, then we need to tell every person to go to college. She didn't want to follow that argument because it shows the absurdity of hers.

While a lot of the obesity in this country is due to poor choices on the person's part, there is a factor that most of the healthy food available is more expensive than the bad food. All processed foods are cheaper than things like fruits and vegetables, although there's talk of making them cost more too with taxes, with no relief for the healthy foods. Poorer families that are trying to make ends meet by buying the junk food will now have to work harder to just get any food.

So the government is failing to handle this in a good manner, which means they would be better off leaving it alone, or taking a secondary position and simply advocating a healthy lifestyle. They have no right to sit there and try to cut coverage based on BMIs or how heavy someone is. That can't even be done now, so how would that be improving health insurance?

[grandmadeb]

Hey, it looks like some kind of discrimination. We don't allow discrimination based on race, religion, sex, age, etc. so why weight? They don't want to open THAT can of worms.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Kinda like Nazi's and Jews, if you aren't Jewish..you are human and you live......if you aren't Muslim you are an infidel....are we headed that way? :innocent:

[JackieB]

The thorny part of the entire healthcare debate is in the remarks of the woman who was a guest on that show. Diseases individuals develop as a result of poor lifestyle choices are largely paid for by others in society, not the ones making the poor choices.

Having said that, I wouldn't want my BMI in a record somewhere. It wouldn't look that good even though I work out every day and eat healthy foods for the most part.

[AUEquine]

Are they using the simple BMI calculator? I've seen a few different calculations out there. One takes into account your natural build, as well as your exercise level, etc. On a simple BMI index I score pretty high because I'm short and big. I do admit that I'm overweight, and am working on that (down 20lbs already). But a good deal of my weight is muscle, oddly enough there is minimal fat on my legs... it's just all in the midsection. Long story short, that simple calculator puts me in the 'morbidly obese' section... like those people stuck in their houses in the bed. Pretty sure I'm far from that, since I still wear a size 12 jean and spend 10 hours a night on my feet at work.
This is ridiculous. My brother is tall and lean, yet he's the one on blood pressure medicine and has been in the hospital a few times with other related issues. Yet I'm 'fat' and I have perfect blood pressure and a cholesterol of 140. But guess who'll be the one the government targets.

[Tiz]

"Diseases individuals develop as a result of poor lifestyle choices are largely paid for by others in society, not the ones making the poor choices. "

I see this alot. I wonder if it's one of those things that's accepted as fact, just because it's what we've been told. Don't people who make poor lifestyle choices like smoking, drinking, driving too fast, eating too much, and so on, usually die younger than those that don't? They don't use the 30 or 40 years of Medicare that longer lived people do. In fact, if you're a smoker, most of you will only be a few years into Medicare before you limit out, and die of lung cancer.

[HoustonFarrier]

This is typical liberal, big government knows best BS. According to the BMI charts, I am obese.......yes, obese, because I am 5'9" tall and weight 206 lbs at 51 years of age......here I am, in all my obesity, lifting on Saturday.:rolleyes:

http://www.baywindfarm.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=495&pictureid=19476 http://www.baywindfarm.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=495&pictureid=19477

Steve

[grandmadeb]

There are tests out there that can tell if you are genetically predisposed to certain diseases or conditions. I guess we will all have to get them so the insurance companies can call them preexisting conditions and refuse to insure you because they may have to pay out. And the stress brought on by knowing you will probably get something because it is in your genes will shorten your life and that will solve the Social Security delimea. They can kill two birds with one stone.

[palomino]

I love seeing your lifting pics Steve!

I think they need to throw out the scale and BMI and start going by bodyfat percentage to ascertain health status, as well as overall fitness. Not some outdated scientific measurement that deems most muscular athletes obese.

On the health care front, I wish that there WOULD be some sort of guidelines in place to 'healthy up' our society. They should make crap food spendy, and healthy food more reasonable. There are so many ways to help people live healthier lives, not by becoming Nazis about weight issues. Ban smoking and drinking then, ban McDonalds, pay people to exercise, give tax cuts to the healthy, I dont know!!

[cowgirlup@idaho]

The government needs to stop trying to micro-manage our very being :mad: It sounds like the government is quickly stepping to become punitive in their ongoing march to control. What next :rolleyes: and what doe this have to do with running the country?

[natisha]

What about freedom of choice?

[natisha]

The government needs to stop trying to micro-manage our very being :mad: It sounds like the government is quickly stepping to become punitive in their ongoing march to control. What next :rolleyes: and what doe this have to do with running the country?It's all about running the Country.
In Countries where the Gov. controls everything there are few fat people but many starving ones. They all started somewhere.

[JackieB]

Don't people who make poor lifestyle choices like smoking, drinking, driving too fast, eating too much, and so on, usually die younger than those that don't?

Yes, I've heard that as well - the argument that poor lifestyle choices don't end up costing taxpayers as much as we think. I'm sure that the data is out there somewhere, but I'd say that overall, it's probably accurate to say that poor health choices cost more.

[JackieB]

What about freedom of choice?

It ends when the choice imposes on others. That's the challenge with healthcare. We give it to everyone becuase it would be inhumane not to. So there is some role here for public debate.

I do agree that this is a poor idea, though. My BMI would be higher than Steve's, but I work really hard to try to stay healthy.

[pandorasmom]

Awesome pics Steve. I for one do not think you're obese! You look fitter then most people I see.

I do wish there wasn't so many obese people, for their own sake. Mainly health reasons.
But do I think think the government should have any say over that? NO!
As if they haven't overstepped enough bounderies already, this just adds to it. It's just another way of taking over freedom.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

but I work really hard to try to stay healthy.

I'm sure you do but it sounds like what you think is ok simply isn't going to be good enough :( The gov wants numbers, statistics, paper-speak, that's what they'll rely on :mad:

[cowgirlup@idaho]

What about freedom of choice?

Obsolete, no longer acceptable, Big Brother will tell you what you like and what you will eat and what you will do as well as when and why :innocent:

Makes me want to eat a whole cheesecake now while I still have the chance/choice :p

[palomino]

mmmm cheesecake....

[mare]

The BMI sure isn't a very good measure of a person's level of fitness. I'm 5'4", 138# and wear size 5 clothing. I'm at the top end of the allowable BMI for my height.

I would have to lose a lot of muscle in order to hit the BMI where I would be considered lean.

Maybe that is the desired effect.

[vicklynn]

BMI is BS as far as Im concerned.
Also, some people have health issues that may cause them to be over weight.

[pandorasmom]

Also, some people have health issues that may cause them to be over weight.

That is true. Maybe they'd give those people a grandfather? I don't really know.

[mare]

We as a country can't afford to give everyone everything that will extend their life.

Where to draw lines on that? I think all the health recommendations from the government since the inception of the Dept. of Health and Human Services and the office of the Surgeon General are an attempt to answer that question.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

It ends when the choice imposes on others. That's the challenge with healthcare. We give it to everyone becuase it would be inhumane not to. So there is some role here for public debate. [...]


What's inhumane, Jackie, is to steal the life-energy from one person at the point of a sword and give it to another against their will.

I'm sure you would argue that healthcare is a "right"... (forgive me for speaking for you, but I think I'm on safe ground here).

So... since it is a "right", it is something that can be taken from others, at the threat of violence. If a doctor, for example, just didn't want to treat some patient (for whatever reason) that doctor could be forced by either threat or real violence to provide whatever service that person wanted-- and free of charge of course. After all... it's a "right".

What other people do we have the "right" to demand the services of?

Slaves. That's who.

I defy you to tell me the difference...

I got yelled at here once for saying that you can scratch a liberal and find a fascist. Yet time and time again I keep being proved right.

[WashingtonBay]

I love seeing your lifting pics Steve!

I think they need to throw out the scale and BMI and start going by bodyfat percentage to ascertain health status, as well as overall fitness. Not some outdated scientific measurement that deems most muscular athletes obese.

On the health care front, I wish that there WOULD be some sort of guidelines in place to 'healthy up' our society. They should make crap food spendy, and healthy food more reasonable. There are so many ways to help people live healthier lives, not by becoming Nazis about weight issues. Ban smoking and drinking then, ban McDonalds, pay people to exercise, give tax cuts to the healthy, I dont know!!

How about we stop trying to make everyone equal, and instead have people be responsible for their own lives, and their own costs, and their own insurance. That way, skinny Seattle urbanites don't have to resent my choices, because they aren't paying for them. And I don't have to resent their busy-body ideas (or yours) to artificially set prices on food based on political correctness "for our own good".

Eh... it's probably too late for that. The busybodies are already in charge of everything.

I would like to see proof that unhealthy people even cost more to care for. It's the healthy people who cost a fortune to keep alive into their 90's. Don't sweat the smokers and the drinkers and the fatties, we'll probably die young.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

How about we stop trying to make everyone equal, and instead have people be responsible for their own lives, and their own costs, and their own insurance. That way, skinny Seattle urbanites don't have to resent my choices, because they aren't paying for them. And I don't have to resent their busy-body ideas (or yours) to artificially set prices on food based on political correctness "for our own good".

:clap: good post WB

[palomino]

I never thought I was being a busybody, but whatever.:)

[JackieB]

What's inhumane, Jackie, is to steal the life-energy from one person at the point of a sword and give it to another against their will.

I actually wasn't commenting from a liberal/conservative perspective on this one, RD. I was simply referring to the fact that anyone who presents him/herself to an emergency room must be treated. I don't know what part of that is politics and what part is the Hippocratic Oath, but I've never heard a single politician speak out against it. So, I just stated it as a fact that is at the heart of this issue.

People with unchecked diseases related to poor lifestyle choices will end up in the hospital sooner or later. And it could be to the tune of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in treatment. We already know that we won't turn them away (that's the "right" part I was referring to, so it is legitimate to discuss how to better deal with it. I don't like it that their unpaid costs work their way down to me.

Regarding my personal opinion on whether or not healthcare is a right, I think access to it at an affordable price is a right. But a lot of my opinion on that also comes from the fact that we already provide it to everyone as I mentioned above.

I'm not in favor of people receiving health insurance without paying an amount for it that encourages them to take their health and healthcare choices into account. Some of the worst consumers of healthcare the ones who have incredibly generous plans. They just don't pay any attention to their healthcare costs at all.

I, on the other hand, have a plan that doesn't pay anything (besides some simple routine stuff) untill I've met my $2,500 annual deductible and then 80% until I've paid $5,000. I also don't have any prescription coverage. My wife and I are both in this plan and we work to control our healthcare costs just like we shop groceries on sale, combine errands to save gas, etc. That's more along the lines of what I think is fair.

I am in favor of mandating insurance coverage, but that's 100% tied to reality that we provide healthcare for everyone. I don't want someone who is exercising his "right" to ride without a helmet falling off his motorcycle and sticking me with a $250K unpaid hospital bill for his head injury because he had no insurance, paid $5,000 of his bill, and walked away from the rest. I know that sounds harsh, but it happens every day and I had a CFO for a major hospital tell me that the cost of the uninsured is huge for all hospitals.

So, I don't think it's accurate to say that I'm approaching this issue from a liberal perspective (although I do accept that description of me as accurate related to most issues). I think I'm actually more fiscally-focused than most conservatives because I just don't hear anyone on the other side of the issue addressing the fact that we pay for healthcare for every citizen whether insured or not.

[JackieB]

I would like to see proof that unhealthy people even cost more to care for. It's the healthy people who cost a fortune to keep alive into their 90's. Don't sweat the smokers and the drinkers and the fatties, we'll probably die young.

You've got a good point there. My 88 year old father gets all kinds of treatment, including an annual MRI for his prostate cancer that has been stable for almost 10 years now and will not affect his longevity. But just try to turn him away and see what even conservative politicians say about "rationing healthcare", "coming between a patient and his doctor", and "death squads".

[WashingtonBay]

I wouldn't dream of turning him away or limiting his care. He can do what he wants and needs for his own life, more power to him! I just don't think the 'unhealthy' person costs more, in the long run.

In either case, if we are all our own ships, paying our own way, then it's nobody's business, and there's no incentive to subsidize wheat germ or tax Big Macs to try to 'make the right thing easy and wrong thing hard'. There's no reason for anyone to run around pinching and measuring our collective spare tires...

Collectivism resents inequity... That's why it needs a 'panel' to decide 'fair'. I would imagine there's some who think riding horses is something it's just too dangerous for people to do.... Don't give 'them' a say in our lives.

Or is it too late for that?

[JackieB]

I wouldn't dream of turning him away or limiting his care.

I would. I love my dad and want him to live as long as he can, but he doesn't need an annual MRI anymore and he gets his insurance from the government (Medicare and as a retired USAF sargeant). He's comfortable, his cancer has been totally in check for years, the annual MRI always turns up the same result (Excellent!), he tolerates and responds to his medication beautifully. What's the value in spending $2,000 or whatever it costs for his MRI every year now?

[WashingtonBay]

I guess you'd have to ask your dad what the value is :)

And when you're 88, I think you should be free to have your own worries checked out. Maybe you'll be obsessing on your own prostate... or your big toe... it's really not anyone's business. :)

I'm guessing prostate though.... these kinds of neuroses tend to pass down whether we want them or not. ;)

[WashingtonBay]

I would. I love my dad and want him to live as long as he can, but he doesn't need an annual MRI anymore and he gets his insurance from the government (Medicare and as a retired USAF sargeant). He's comfortable, his cancer has been totally in check for years, the annual MRI always turns up the same result (Excellent!), he tolerates and responds to his medication beautifully. What's the value in spending $2,000 or whatever it costs for his MRI every year now?

Now... the cynic in me, having just come from my dentist, is that it's actually his doctor pushing the MRI, because it's covered. My dentist (the hygenist, actually) absolutely hates it if I fail to use all of my allotted coverage for the year. I had a pre-pario deep cleaning last year because they said I was borderline. Because of that diagnosis, I qualify for more work! Frankly, I'm skeptical. Now they want me to come in every 3 months for a cleaning. For no other reason than because "I might as well, it's covered!". I'm pushing it out to 4-5 months because it's just too many people in my mouth too often.

[JackieB]

it's really not anyone's business. :)


But it's not private insurance, WB. The taxpayers are covering the MRI.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Pretty soon we'll all be on medicare, so it doesn't really matter.

Medicare will be the only game in town... since that is what Obamacare is... it's medicare for "everybody". Those of us lucky enough to still have doctors will like it, right up to the point when our doctors quit the game.

My doctor has already quit. I'm just hoping I don't get sick between now and whenever we can repeal this thing.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

[...]
So, I don't think it's accurate to say that I'm approaching this issue from a liberal perspective [...]

Nonsense. You think it's OK for one person to suck the life energy from someone else in order to do what they've failed to do for themselves.

Apparently it is the "right" of anyone to take whatever they need from someone who has that.

Excuse me... but I think I need a lawn tractor. I'm going to go around the neighborhood and see who has what I what but needs it less than I do.

[JackieB]

Nonsense. You think it's OK for one person to suck the life energy from someone else in order to do what they've failed to do for themselves.

I do? Hmmm, who knew. I'm done debating with you, RD.

[AUEquine]

Ok, just went and pulled up the CDC's BMI calculator. I of course am in the 'obese' category, but what shocks me more is what it says I should weigh. They say I should weigh 108-140... are you freaking kidding me! I haven't weighed 108 since I was in early elementary school. I weighed 140 when I was in 9th grade before I started weight lifting.
I'm currently under the care of a doctor for my weight loss. Due to many issues, mostly working 3rd shift and long hours, they've put me on meds for weight loss. At my last appointment my doc and I talked about my goals, and she said that she would be uncomfortable with me getting down to 150. That even 150 wouldn't be healthy for me. So who should decide my healthcare? A blanket, inaccurate calculator... or a licensed physician who knows me and my lifestyle?

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Nonsense. You think it's OK for one person to suck the life energy from someone else in order to do what they've failed to do for themselves.

Apparently it is the "right" of anyone to take whatever they need from someone who has that.


;) :innocent:

[Cat]

Who here is aware the BMI calculation changed in 1998? I remember it very clearly. I ran cross country, ran track, lifted weights, and could wear a bikini - but with the change I went from "healthy weight" to "overweight" according to the chart.

[natisha]

I can wear a bikini too but I probably shouldn't.

[AUEquine]

Who here is aware the BMI calculation changed in 1998? I remember it very clearly. I ran cross country, ran track, lifted weights, and could wear a bikini - but with the change I went from "healthy weight" to "overweight" according to the chart.

Exactly according to the chart, my entire high school career I was 'overweight' to 'obese'. And at that time I was playing varsity volleyball, national league volleyball (the team that travels across the country), varsity softball, and riding/showing horses. I was a size 6/8 and wore a bikini as well. But according the the government I was a tub of lard.

If this crap seriously passes, they won't be worrying about teenage girls with eating disorders they'll be worried about grown people with them. Not for image, but to save money. And on that financial note, why is a salad more expensive at a fast food restaurant than a burger and fries?

[Kara]

Im surprisingly in the healthy range. 23.3 (for a women's BMI), I'm also 5'5 so sort of tall.


Ideal weight for me is 126... I would be a stick, and another 14 pounds to lose

[JackieB]

;) :innocent:

I assume this is what you are agreeing with:

"You think it's OK for one person to suck the life energy from someone else in order to do what they've failed to do for themselves."

I didn't say that, cowgirlup. NOT AT ALL. And I don't believe it, either. Please go back and read my post carefully and then decide if you still agree. There are a lot of points in my argument that I think any conservative could accept.

I kind of brushed it off, but it really did make me angry. I have made it very clear that I pay my own way with regard to healthcare and all other things as well, and I fully support requiring others to do the same.

The key point in my argument is that the Hippocratic Oath, the position of virtually all of our elected officials, and the laws as well require a hospital to treat any person who shows up at the emergency room. Therefore, we already provide healthcare to everyone in the country, so there is at least a legitimate reason for debating how to better account for the costs.

I don't appreciate being told that I think it's OK to "suck the life energy from someone else". I hope you will reconsider my position and give me credit for it.

[Tiz]

"I have made it very clear that I pay my own way with regard to healthcare and all other things as well, and I fully support requiring others to do the same."


I think the confusing part of your position, Jackie, is that you support the healthcare bill, yet don't support forcefully taking other people's money to pay for it.

[JackieB]

I think the confusing part of your position, Jackie, is that you support the healthcare bill, yet don't support forcefully taking other people's money to pay for it.

Well thanks for at least clarifying where the confusion lies in my argument. I definitely appreciate it. I am almost done with the politics section entirely, but if I do leave it and visit only other parts of the forum, I'll always appreciate how you've treated me. You, WB, and Natisha (three that come to mind, I'm sure there are others, too) are excellent debate opponents.

I'm not sure why I'm having so much trouble getting this across. It seems to be a stumbling block for my conservative friends here at home as well. The fact is that we already forcefully take other people's money to pay for healthcare. Not yelling there, just trying to be extra clear. We have for decades.

The insured pay for the uninsured who default. Perhaps as much as $1,000/year for the average policyholder goes to cover costs hospitals have to pass along for uninsured. In fact, mandating insurance was original George Bush senior's idea as a way to force people to accept responsibility. Just like drivers are forced to carry insurance because we know that a wreck can so easily surpass a person's ability to ever pay for damages.

When it was a conservative idea, it was wrong to go without insurance because too many people left their bills unpaid and that amounted to forcefully taking other people's money to pay for healthcare.

Secondly, Medicare is 100% socialized medicine. Seniors like my 88 year old dad take far more out of that program than they ever put in. But I have yet to hear a single Republican politician call for the abolishment of Medicare.

All I've ever really done is said that these issues call for a resolution, that while not perfect I think the plan Congress passed this spring is a step in the right direction, and somehow that makes me a fascist.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Nonsense. You think it's OK for one person to suck the life energy from someone else in order to do what they've failed to do for themselves.

Apparently it is the "right" of anyone to take whatever they need from someone who has that.

This is what I agree with in it's entirety. No, it's not pretty or sugar coated, but is to the point. Can I make it nicer? "You think it's ok for some to get for FREE what they've failed to do for themselves." "It is ok to take from those who have, it's a "right" ".

Although I think you stand with this, it's not all about you. This is what a LOT of people think and are hoping to see happen, it takes a lot off of their plate, like getting a job and doing for themselves.

I understand that the ER cannot turn people away and I'm ok with that. I don't want to enable those w/o ambition to continue to "suck the life energy out of those that do". There's no incentive in that.

I also find it curious that you call me out for agreeing with RD, yet all you can respond with to his statement (the statement he authored that offended you) is not talking to him anymore.

[natisha]

As a conservative this is what I see as wrong with the proposed HC plan.
Yes, we already pay for the uninsured, like we do with shop lifters- with higher costs. If it has worked kind of well why change?
I worry about the things we don't know about yet but seem to be a consequence of the HC plan.
Like rationed care, people not wanting to be doctors, lack of specialists, waiting lists, lack of research- both medical & pharmaceutical, paying for abortions, lack of incentive for hospitals to improve, lack of competition, lowering the quality bar to make things 'equal',forced compliance, intrusion into private lives & finger pointing when someone is found to be less than ideal & how that is dealt with.

My main beef is putting something so important into the hands of so-called Government officials who have proven time & again that they can't manage anything.Insurance companies will go out of business eventually & once we have full blown Socialized Medicine how do we ever go back?
And it's nobody's damn business what my BMI is :mad:

[Tiz]

Thank you, Jackie. It's very sweet of you to say that.

Most people I know recognize that Medicare and Medicaid are desperately mismanaged, and add to the cost of doctors and hospitals for the people who don't qualify for those programs. The government doesn't pay for actual charges, as I'm sure you know. That is probably where the bulk of guestimated $1000 extra cost per person, per year to health insurance policy holders comes. Not from the uninsured, because the uninsured don't use doctors and hospitals much.

Most people I know recognize that Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are socialist programs, and as such, they cost very much more, and are misused much more than is possible in the free and private market. And they drive costs up, not down.

George Bush tried to introduce reforms to Social Security, by the way, and a plethora of anti GW ads depicting Granny abuse at his hands were produced as a response. Full strength Democrat demonization from Congress, as well. I don't remember if that succeeded in stalling the process, or if it was interrupted when 9/11 happened and took so much energy and attention away from domestic affairs.

These programs are a disgrace. In fact, if any person in the private sector did what our government has done to the retirement fund they've collected for all these years, they would be rooming with Bernie Madoff.

Great site here, with just the facts. Here are a few statements from George Bush on the subject, when he was in office.

http://www.ssa.gov/history/gwbushstmts.html#05022001
http://www.ssa.gov/history/gwbushstmts.html#07122001
http://www.ssa.gov/history/gwbushstmts2.html#02282002
http://www.ssa.gov/history/gwbushstmts3.html#012903
http://www.ssa.gov/history/gwbushstmts3.html#07302003

[DarsMom]

Though I do agree to a point with JackieB about the fact that people go to healthcare facilities and get treated, only to walk away from the bill, and the average American pays for it...I do agree with that...it does happen.

I also agree that with the HC bill (I call it OBAMACARE) it will not be much different. Those who will need treatment will get it, at the hands of the taxpayer.

What I DISAGREE with about the HC bill is the fact that the American citizen will be FORCED to purchase healthcare, due to federal law, and PENALIZED if they do not do so. HOW is this constitutional? How is this still a republic, and how is it still Capitalism? Simple....by definition, its not.

There will also be rationing of HC. Please tell me how is this ANY DIFFERENT from what Hitler tried to do? He tried to create and preserve a race of people that were 'in his eyes', perfect. So the rest were killed. Makes no difference that he saw the Jews and Poles and Russians as dirt. They were NOT given the right to live. So tell me, if someone is ill and needs care, is it OKAY and different from Naziism to deny them treatment in the name of 'rationing'? WHO decides who gets rationed? Rationing health care is not a death camp, nor is it a gas chamber, but its playing God just the same!

I see this perhaps from a bigger picture standpoint... we arent just losing our freedoms, we are being herded into slaughterhouses. Sound extreme? You betcha, and I meant it that way.

The country has become so PC that we are strangled by our own laws. We have free speech, but to what extent, and for how long?

We are about to lose our CHOICE of healthcare and the ability to afford it or not....we are losing our CHOICE of producing our own foods (look at produce and raw milk legislation!) and our CHOICE of what we are 'allowed' to eat or not to eat.

We are losing our jobs and small businesses at an alarming rate, only to make us MORE dependent on the government for help, or paying foreign countries for products we need to survive.

For instance, the family farmer is no more, not on the scale it should be in a country with as much rich agricultural history as we do. The government has PAID farmers NOT to work their lands....this started happening several years ago, and now the children of those farmers wouldnt know one end of a tractor from the other, and the family farm has long gone anyway.
The legislations and regulations that are being put into place by OUR government, is slowly squeezing the life out of those that still stand, and making it impossible to sell their product or even produce it.

Who cares you say? I care. I care because now we are dependent on everything being imported, from countries who do not have the same standards of production and safety as we do. I care because if I can grow it, then cant I, and WHY should I be forced to buy it? This makes no sense to the average American. I just wish it made no sense to the other part of the voting population.

Again, we are slowly having the life squeezed out of us. The OP on this thread is prime example. If you are fat, then you will be penalized. So WHO deems you are fat? The government. Who decides what you eat? Guess who. Who will eventually tell you where you are to live? Guess who again. And WHO will tell you that you are worthy to LIVE? Think about it.

Paranoid? Nope. I am realistic. I am sick and tired of losing my freedoms, in tiny steps though it may be, and no one seems to get the bigger picture.

Sorry to rant, but if you dont say it, then no one hears it. If you dont hear it, then you are not informed.

[JackieB]

I also find it curious that you call me out for agreeing with RD, yet all you can respond with to his statement (the statement he authored that offended you) is not talking to him anymore.

Oh, I'll talk to RD. I'm just no debating politics with him anymore. But I guess I didn't respond because I don't know how I could change his opinion if he really thinks I believe it's OK to "suck the life energy from someone else in order to do what they've failed to do for themselves" Not much I can say to respond to that, I guess. I haven't ever given any indication that I feel that way, and I sure wouldn't have made a comment like that about him.

The reason why I wrote to you is that I was hopeful that you might read what I wrote and see my point.

[JackieB]

I understand that the ER cannot turn people away and I'm ok with that.

OK, but please be aware that most people who are uninsured and present themselves to an ER with a serious injury/illness only pay a small portion of their bill. The rest gets paid by those who have insurance and the government. That's about as unfair as it gets as far as I'm concerned.

[JackieB]

Yes, we already pay for the uninsured, like we do with shop lifters- with higher costs. If it has worked kind of well why change?

Well, because it isn't working well in my opinion, and would just continue to get worse if we don't address the problem. My wife and I pay a very large percentage of our annual income for health insurance premiums, with no prescription coverage, and very high deductibles. And that's if we don't get sick.

And I'll bet you have a terrific BMI. :)

[gabhainn]

Who decides what you eat? Guess who.


Soylent Green is People.........;).............Kevin

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

I do? Hmmm, who knew. I'm done debating with you, RD.

Dang it, Jackie... I'm getting awfully tired of walking on eggshells around you. You know I would never mean anything to be personally insulting. You know that. You ~know~ I respect your opinions, and I'm glad you at least have the guts to argue here when others just run away. But dang, man... sometimes I get angry at things too, alright? You're not the only one with emotional reactions to things. Most of the time I manage to contain my emotional reactions. But not always. That's just part of being human. You should see the posts I write up but just delete. :)

A weakness of the english language is that we don't have the "collective" or formal "you" like the french or other romance languages do. The "you" in that post was meant toward liberals writ large, moreso than you personally.

With regard to the main point: You ~have~ said before that you believe healthcare is a "right", just like the standard liberal writ large position. You even said something upthread about it being "humane" or something to provide free care for people.

To say that something is a "right" means that it is something that people can have without paying for it. Life. Liberty. Pursuit of happiness... Not things you have to pay to get. What other rights do you have to pay to get? None. Generally, it's just something you have. But healthcare requires the work of other people. To demand it as a right is to TAKE from others. Life... liberty... pursuit of happiness... and healthcare from the doctor of my choice.

Do I have the ~right~ to automotive care from the mechanic of my choice? No... frankly, I don't. What is really different about medicine? I have to pay my mechanic to work on my car. I would expect to have to pay for a doctor's services as well. Or the work of people that make medicines.

Something that must be provided by other people is simply never, EVER, a right. To take it by force (as in Obamacare) still doesn't make it a right, it just makes those people slaves. That's the only class of people that other people have a "right" to their labor.

[DarsMom]

A weakness of the english language is that we don't have the "collective" or formal "you" like the french or other romance languages do. The "you" in that post was meant toward liberals writ large, moreso than you personally.


Yikes, maybe I should have put that as a disclaimer on my post....I wasnt targeting anyone either. :(

[JackieB]

Dang it, Jackie... I'm getting awfully tired of walking on eggshells around you. You know I would never mean anything to be personally insulting. You know that. You ~know~ I respect your opinions, and I'm glad you at least have the guts to argue here when others just run away.

Alright, that's fair. I apologize. I'm actually not that thin-skinned generally speaking, but I really did think that you meant me personally. I felt like you were accusing me of not caring enough about others to respect their lives and money. So, I overreacted. The second time I've done that with you in about a week, so I can see where it can be exasperating.

Let's just scratch this off and go back to where we were previously, which is respecting each other's opinions even though we come at issues from opposing sides. Or, since you never left that position, I'll come back to where I was.

I won't make you feel like you have to be careful around me again. Really. I know what that feels like myself. Sorry.

[JackieB]

Yikes, maybe I should have put that as a disclaimer on my post....I wasnt targeting anyone either. :(

No, it's OK. I just overreacted.

[WashingtonBay]

:cheers:

[DarsMom]

Oh I wasnt saying that you overreacted, I just didnt want you or anyone else take my words as being pointed towards anyone specific. :) No worries :D

[JackieB]

With regard to the main point: You ~have~ said before that you believe healthcare is a "right", just like the standard liberal writ large position. You even said something upthread about it being "humane" or something to provide free care for people.

To say that something is a "right" means that it is something that people can have without paying for it.

Let me clarify these comments a little. My "humane" comment was related to the Hippocratic Oath and the position of all elected officials. I just meant "that's the way it is", not that I necessarily considered it to be appropriate. I guess it would be more accurate to say that practically speaking healthcare is a right because we afford it to all, regardless of ability to pay.

I don't think free healthcare is a right. I think we should all be able to have access to health insurance at affordable rates. I realize that "affordable" is subjective.

[Tiz]

Jackie, RD is RD. He talks how he talks. He can be how he is, and you can be how you are. Sometimes you'll get mad, sometimes he'll get mad. It would be so much more interesting if you just hammered him when you thought he had it coming, instead of threatening to pull up stakes all the time.

Come on now. Where's all that liberal tolerance when you need it? Don't check out. We would miss you.

[Tiz]

Oh, you're back. Nevermind!

[JackieB]

Do I have the ~right~ to automotive care from the mechanic of my choice? No... frankly, I don't. What is really different about medicine?

That's kind of the crux of my whole argument and what I feel like I pound my head against the wall to get across sometimes. To follow your auto analogy and apply it to healthcare, you are able to present your "car" to an incredibly well-equipped auto shop (e.g trauma center) and say - "Fix my car. It's totalled. You aren't allow to turn me away. I'll pay you $5 and you can do whatever you want with the other $15K of my bill."

[Tiz]

I can't wait until November when Democrats will lose Congress, and we can demand that this 2000 plus pages of who knows what can be repealed. Only market based reforms will bring healthcare costs down.

[JackieB]

Great site here, with just the facts. Here are a few statements from George Bush on the subject, when he was in office.


I'll accept this, Tiz. From the day I got out of college (we already saw the social security crisis coming), I have maintained that I would gladly sign a pledge to not take one penny of Social Security if I could just be dismissed from the program. I have always been one to put the maximum in my 401(k) and I would have done the same with the additional 7.5% that I paid in to Social Security and Medicare. I never needed the federal government to help me save for my retirement.

I agree that those are poor plans that are unsustainable.

[WashingtonBay]

I think the only way to bring any market forces into medicine is to get employers out of the health care business so people actually shop and care how much it costs for insurance. And care how much their care choices affect their premiums. That would be a start.

But... I bet that will never happen. It's not feasible to eliminate employer plans... We're not going to 'ban' employers from offering it.

But we all know my dream, and that's no insurance at all. Fee for service, just like our veterinarians operate. Free market.

Blathering in a dream world again.

[natisha]

Two guys here share a moment of sensitivity & my man Kevin comes along with Soylent Green :hysterical:

[JackieB]

I think the only way to bring any market forces into medicine is to get employers out of the health care business so people actually shop and care how much it costs for insurance.

That is the best, best idea. Since when is it your employer's job to provide for your health anyway? The don't provide car insurance or home insurance. Some of the worst consumers of healthcare I have ever known were those with "Cadillac" insurance plans. They just don't care what it costs.

[WashingtonBay]

Glad you agree! But we're going in the opposite direction: *Requiring* employers to provide coverage.

[gabhainn]

Two guys here share a moment of sensitivity & my man Kevin comes along with Soylent Green :hysterical:
well then how about Milton?

do they only stand
By ignorance, is that their happy state,
The proof of their obedience and their faith?

[WashingtonBay]

well then how about Milton?


The dude with the stapler?

http://www.dcs-media.com/content/images/milton.jpg

:p

[DarsMom]

Oh sheesh...that expression will give me nightmares!! LOLOL

[gabhainn]

The dude with the stapler?

http://www.dcs-media.com/content/images/milton.jpg

:p
no but he is probably more fun....Kevin

[JackieB]

Jackie, RD is RD. He talks how he talks. He can be how he is, and you can be how you are. Sometimes you'll get mad, sometimes he'll get mad. It would be so much more interesting if you just hammered him when you thought he had it coming, instead of threatening to pull up stakes all the time.

Come on now. Where's all that liberal tolerance when you need it? Don't check out. We would miss you.

Thanks. You're right. I'm a little embarrassed. I'll stop being a Prima Donna. :)

[JackieB]

Glad you agree! But we're going in the opposite direction: *Requiring* employers to provide coverage.

I didn't like that provision. Perhaps it will be stripped out by a future Congress.

Although I don't wish to see any employee stressed by losing healthcare coverage, I've long thought that we move closer to leveling the playing field each time a company drops healthcare. I especially think that it's important for government workers not to receive healthcare in retirement. Nobody in the private sector gets it anymore, but we have to pay taxes to give them incredible benefits during their early retirements. There's just no incentive for those employees to want to see this problem addressed.

[twofingers]

"Since when is it your employer's job to provide for your health anyway?" JackieB
it never was. after the depression employers were trying to find ways to get people back to work, but had little money. so they offered to help with medical bills. Blue cross was the first to develop an Insurance policy. and the industry grew from there. In fact it worked rather well until the sixties when the govt. really began to interfere. It has never been a right. though is is a beatitude - blessed are they who comfort the sick and dieing.
:sick:

[Gem's Mom]

Those height/weight bmi calculators are pretty inaccurate. To get a real reading there's pinching and measuring and stuff like that involved. We had bmi's measured during track in college. Even more accurate than that is what some wrestlers I knew in high school did, some kind of volume measuring thing involving holding your breath and getting dunked into a tank of water to see how much you displace? That was nuts, I'd prefer the pinching.

And really, your bmi should be between you and your doctor. If you're unhealthy and fat that's something your doctor should be counseling you on how to improve. If your doctor doesn't care then, well, get a new doctor. And I guess if you don't have insurance right now and don't have a doctor then it hasn't been addressed yet?

I think the airhead in the interview wasn't explaining the issue very well. I'd hope that all it means is that in a situation where everyone is going to have insurance that the "healthy" people will have lower premiums than the "unhealthy" and bmi is going to be one of the things to help determine who's healthy and who's not. But again, they'll need to get a more accurate bmi since the height/weight calculator is waaaaay off if you have any kind of muscling.

I do like the idea that everyone will be offered insurance. I had a blood clot (and PE) when I was in college for no reason. When I aged out of my parent's insurance I had to pay ridiculous cobra premiums every month to have some kind of coverage since no other insurance company would cover me. Active, healthy (other than that dvt) college grad not able to get insurance = crappy. I had to get on a group plan to get any coverage. And without coverage routine medical care, prescriptions, dr visits and such would have been way out of my price range.

[HoustonFarrier]

Since when is it your employer's job to provide for your health anyway?

Careful Jackie......you're treading on Conservative principles here........take your statement up a notch......

"Since when it is the govt's job to provide for your health" ??? :D:D

Steve

[natisha]

I think if we could strip JackieB of his trust in Government we would find a conservative JackieB.

[grandmadeb]

What is the point of all that privacy stuff if you have to tell all to the gov't?

[Tiz]

"From the day I got out of college (we already saw the social security crisis coming), I have maintained that I would gladly sign a pledge to not take one penny of Social Security if I could just be dismissed from the program. I have always been one to put the maximum in my 401(k) and I would have done the same with the additional 7.5% that I paid in to Social Security and Medicare. I never needed the federal government to help me save for my retirement."


"Fixing" Social Security has been a campaign issue in every election that I've ever voted in, and I'm older than you, Jackie. I think that proves how corrupt and conniving our politicians are, more than how difficult the problem is.

You've done the right thing, and planned for your future, without depending on the government's Social Security. It's clear that you're proud of that, and you should be. It bothers me though, that you don't seem to be mad as hell about the 15.3% of income you were forced to donate to government, for what amounts to nothing.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Since when is it your employer's job to provide for your health anyway? The don't provide car insurance or home insurance. Some of the worst consumers of healthcare I have ever known were those with "Cadillac" insurance plans. They just don't care what it costs.

It's not the 'job' of an employer to provide health insurance, it's a perc, an incentive to remain with that employer who values you and what you do for the company.

My family is fortunate enough to have a "Cadillac" insurance plan through my husband's job. We don't run to the Dr. for minor things. I haven't been to the Dr. in a few years because I am healthy. My husband has not been in one year. The remaining child at home went in 9/09 with a back injury, a one time visit. My out of home son who also works for the same company with the same plan has not been to the Dr. in 3 years.

My husband manages the insurance progam from the company side of things and they have employee discussions on plan abuse and how to responsibly plan their use of the healthcare plan. The company is "self-insured" because they could not find a existing health insurance company that economically provided the health coverage that was desired by owners for the employees.

Let's see, 3 years ago, a young employee of 32yrs of age recieved a liver transplant 2 weeks before he would have expired, a miracle that a donar was found, he was born with his ailment. Many older employees have recieved treatment for cancer or heart problems that are ongoing. The company stands behind these individuals, it's a committment.

Do we care what we incurr as medical expense? You bet we do, we are responsible that way. We work hard to have what we have. Please don't paint everyone with the same brush.

[JackieB]

It bothers me though, that you don't seem to be mad as hell about the 15.3% of income you were forced to donate to government, for what amounts to nothing.

It bothers me, but I try not to get too worked up about things over which I have little or no control. I'm pretty realistic about how entrenched Social Security and Medicare are in our country.

But I certainly could support the anti-Social Security/Medicare portion of a party's platform (I'm guessing the Tea Party must be opposed to both).

It's harder now that we are self employed and have to write those checks out each quarter. There aren't any deductions for this category, either. Well, there's one tiny one, but I dont know what it's for. Instead of 15.3%, we get to pay like 14.5% or something.

Taxes are our single biggest household expenditure every year. Federal, state, local, and then property taxes.

[WashingtonBay]

Do we care what we incurr as medical expense? You bet we do, we are responsible that way. We work hard to have what we have. Please don't paint everyone with the same brush.

Alright... now don't you start viewing every criticism of a system as a personal insult either.

IMHO, it's messed up when people who want to build widgets have to provide medical insurance to everyone they hire to build them. Not only does it require them to invest time, money and energy on something that has nothing to do with their area of expertise, it increases the cost of the widgets, and takes the employee out of the decision making.

I know employers started out offering medical as a perk, then it became an expectation, and now it's going to be a requirement.

Ford used to build cars, now they're a pension and medical insurance company that makes cars to offset part of it's costs.

[JackieB]

Do we care what we incurr as medical expense? You bet we do, we are responsible that way. We work hard to have what we have. Please don't paint everyone with the same brush.

Great. I applaud you for taking care with consideration of your insurance plan's expenses. And I'm sure there are many employees with "Cadillac" plans who are as careful as you are.

I still think my original point is just as strong, though. If a person isn't paying for something him/herself, there just isn't the incentive to be particularly concerned with what it costs.

[JackieB]

I know employers started out offering medical as a perk, then it became and expectation, and now it's going to be a requirement.


Perhaps that part can be stripped out by a future Congress.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

A curious note on all this is that employer-provided health insurance isn't even all that old, as a common practice. It was the wage and price controls of the 70's (which even Nixon later said was a huge mistake) that really kicked off the stops. With employers unable to compete by offering higher wages, they turned to other perks... company cars, expense accounts... and health insurance. Sure, those things happened before but it wasn't widespread. Most people shopped for family insurance policies just like they shopped for auto, homeowners or life insurance. Observe, that with those other types of insurance, costs are not spiraling out of control.

Suddenly it was everywhere. Health insurance became a "right", not because it is a right, but because people just expected it as an entitlement from their employer like a desk and a phone and a red stapler. Once people feel entitled to something it is difficult and traumatic to take it away and make them pay for it again. But that is what must happen if we hope to keep the finest level of medical care in the world.

If we choose the third-world model and nationalize healthcare we'll control costs alright, but the quality of medicine will plummet.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Alright... now don't you start viewing every criticism of a system as a personal insult either.

IMHO, it's messed up when people who want to build widgets have to provide medical insurance to everyone they hire to build them. Not only does it require them to invest time, money and energy on something that has nothing to do with their area of expertise, it increases the cost of the widgets, and takes the employee out of the decision making.

I know employers started out offering medical as a perk, then it became an expectation, and now it's going to be a requirement.

Ford used to build cars, now they're a pension and medical insurance company that makes cars to offset part of it's costs.

I agree with the 'expectation' and the "requirement" piece, that should never happen, but if a company wants to comp their employees with health insurance, why not? It draws better potential employees and then keeps them. It doesn't necessarily raise the cost of the company's product to the consumer, the company still has to compete with others that provide like products.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

I still think my original point is just as strong, though. If a person isn't paying for something him/herself, there just isn't the incentive to be particularly concerned with what it costs.

But that is my aruement too :p the people who are currently getting free medical via our tax dollars, are guilty of this very thing (not all of them). At our local hospital they are called "frequent fliers", the same people come in monthly and often weekly to the ER with a 'headache' or some such thing, often they are drug seeking. But the point is, as you said yourself, there just isn't the incentive to be concerned with the cost. I just don't believe that the Obamacare (don't know what else to call it) is the answer. I believe that just the opposite will happen.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

I think it was William F. Buckley who said, a few decades ago: "If you think medical care is expensive now, just wait until it's free..."

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Alright... now don't you start viewing every criticism of a system as a personal insult either.

I take personal insult often, I just recognize it for that, personal and not intentional. I don't normally respond as you know. But once in a while a general blanket statement across the board, needs to be addressed, confronted maybe? and opened up a little more to see both sides of the coin so to speak.

[Tiz]

"Ford used to build cars, now they're a pension and medical insurance company that makes cars to offset part of it's costs."

Very clever, and true. Good one. How would you include unions in your sentence though?

[Gem's Mom]

Now just because healthcare is going to be offered to everyone, who said that it has to be free? Did I miss something??

I never wanted free healthcare coverage I just wanted SOMEONE to cover me, which can't happen unless I'm in a group plan.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

I never wanted free healthcare coverage I just wanted SOMEONE to cover me, which can't happen unless I'm in a group plan.

Ok, and you should, but do I have to give up my choice of a group plan? (and I'm not saying you said that). I like my plan, I don't want to give it up. I don't trust the government to replace it with something even remotely close to what I have now.

[JackieB]

Now just because healthcare is going to be offered to everyone, who said that it has to be free? Did I miss something??

I never wanted free healthcare coverage I just wanted SOMEONE to cover me, which can't happen unless I'm in a group plan.

This has always been my position, too. I have an individual policy, but only because the State of Michigan requires BCBS to sell it to me at a negotiated price. If I had to go to the open market and shop for insurance, I'd never be able to afford it, and I don't have particularly troublesome health problems. People with diabetes, cancer survivors, etc., wouldn't get individual policies at all.