Mid Term U.S. Election

[Rockin' Flames]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

You don't think Obama knows how to compromise? That's all he's been doing. Reaching across the aisle over and over again to try and build consensus and the Republicans returned the favor by never voting for one of his initiatives. Laws he watered down begging them to vote with him.

After the election two sentiments stand out:

Obama: Let's reach across the aisle and get things done.

Jay Boehner: There will be NO COMPROMISE.

Boehner's not bluffing either. There's no compromise left in the Republican Party.

I'm not saying the Repulicans are innocent in everything that's happened and are part of the problem. I can't say Obama begged anyone but people in his own party to vote with him. The Democrats could barely pass what Obama wanted when they controlled the house and the Senate. If you can't get your own party on board with your agenda why are you worrying about the other side of the isle. Any of the big ideas that the Republicans offered in one particular bill the Democrats wanted nothing to do with (ie. selling insurance accross state lines or tort reform). So I don't know how much willingness there was to compromise before or how much compromise there will be now.

Leading up to the election Obama sure didn't sound like he wanted to compromise when he said some of the things he did.

“If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re going to punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us..." Link.

"we can't have special interests sitting shotgun. We gotta have middle class families up in front. We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back." Link

And before you mention that this is election talk I know that but still it seems like he's speaking out both sides of his mouth sometimes which is why I said this will be interesting to watch. This will be the responsibility of both parties to get something done, and I can't say I'm overly optomistic that anything will get done in the next two years.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

"President Barack Obama on Friday hailed new "encouraging" job numbers and said it is imperative that Democrats and Republicans work together to improve the economy."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/...iref=allsearch

Adding 60,000 jobs is encouraging?

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Adding 60,000 jobs is encouraging?

Where is that number in the article?

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by PIMking

Be my guest and take Diplomatic trips; but at 200 Million a day? Didn't his wife take a trip that was like 20 million a couple of months ago.

False

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Adding 60,000 jobs is encouraging?

false,

As per the Bureau of labor and Statistics.

"Nonfarm payroll employment increased by 151,000 in October, and the
unemployment rate was unchanged at 9.6 percent, the U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics reported today. Since December 2009, nonfarm payroll
employment has risen by 874,000."

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by Rockin' Flames

I'm not saying the Repulicans are innocent in everything that's happened and are part of the problem. I can't say Obama begged anyone but people in his own party to vote with him. The Democrats could barely pass what Obama wanted when they controlled the house and the Senate. If you can't get your own party on board with your agenda why are you worrying about the other side of the isle. Any of the big ideas that the Republicans offered in one particular bill the Democrats wanted nothing to do with (ie. selling insurance accross state lines or tort reform). So I don't know how much willingness there was to compromise before or how much compromise there will be now.

Leading up to the election Obama sure didn't sound like he wanted to compromise when he said some of the things he did.

“If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re going to punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us..." Link.

"we can't have special interests sitting shotgun. We gotta have middle class families up in front. We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back." Link

And before you mention that this is election talk I know that but still it seems like he's speaking out both sides of his mouth sometimes which is why I said this will be interesting to watch. This will be the responsibility of both parties to get something done, and I can't say I'm overly optomistic that anything will get done in the next two years.

Selling insurance across statelines is a scam basically. What it would mean is all the insurance companies would be allowed to operate out of the state with the least regulation of insurance companies. It was just another idea to please the corporate sponsors.

Obama up to the election isn't the Obama that is actually governing. That's what Progressives are so upset about. So quoting him before election doesn't indicate anything about what's he's actually done.

The fact is no Republican was going to vote for any sort of healthcare reform, no matter the compromise from Obama. The healthcare debate was absurd in the first place, the system is obviously broken with skyrocketing fees, not insuring those with pre-existing conditions, and healthcare companies developing systems for denying coverage when someone gets diagnosed with breast cancer by finding a pre-existing condition the person didn't report. This included things like acne. Along with millions uninsured that cost the government a ton of money anyway when they go to the hospital.

And the Republican solution was tort reform and allowing insurance companies to operate across state lines. That's not a reasonable stance. They needed to propose solutions to those problems I listed. They didn't. They aren't a party, they're a corrupt joke.

And Obama still worked with them as if they were reasonable people with the people's interest in mind. That's what everyone should be mad at Obama for, that he's actually naive enough to try to compromise with Republicans.

[Rockin' Flames]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

And the Republican solution was tort reform and allowing insurance companies to operate across state lines. That's not a reasonable stance. They needed to propose solutions to those problems I listed. They didn't. They are a party, they're a corrupt joke.

Tort reform would probably be one of the most important pieces that should be passed. One of the big reasons health care costs are so high is that doctors are practicing to cover there own butts down here so that they don't get sued. For example I went to the doctor when I first moved down here for a cold. He gave me chest x-rays, sinus x-rays, blood test, etc. which is compared to when I would go to a doctor in Canada I wouldn't get any of those tests. A lot of people in the US are so sue happy in the US they will try to find anything to sue someone.

The fact that congress or the senate won't even look at tort reform shows that they are either all lawyers are get a lot of money from lawyers and really don't want to piss them off.

As for corrupt I guess telling people to pass the bill to find out what's in it like what Pelosi said doesn't sound corrupt to you. Both the Democrats and Republicans are beholden to special interests (this includes Obama), and both parties are to blame for whats wrong in the US today.

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by Rockin' Flames

Tort reform would probably be one of the most important pieces that should be passed. One of the big reasons health care costs are so high is that doctors are practicing to cover there own butts down here so that they don't get sued. For example I went to the doctor when I first moved down here for a cold. He gave me chest x-rays, sinus x-rays, blood test, etc. which is compared to when I would go to a doctor in Canada I wouldn't get any of those tests. A lot of people in the US are so sue happy in the US they will try to find anything to sue someone.

The fact that congress or the senate won't even look at tort reform shows that they are either all lawyers are get a lot of money from lawyers and really don't want to piss them off.

As for corrupt I guess telling people to pass the bill to find out what's in it like what Pelosi said doesn't sound corrupt to you. Both the Democrats and Republicans are beholden to special interests (this includes Obama), and both parties are to blame for whats wrong in the US today.

He gave you all those tests so he could charge you for them, not to cover his ass.

Both parties are tied to special interest that's true, but one party is completely tied and one is partially tied. I already went over that in one of my posts. The only Republicans who aren't tied to special interests are Ron Paul and, I think, Rand Paul. Pelosi and the house passed the Public Option which would be real reform and really hurt the insurance companies. So how exactly is that corrupt or tied to special interests? You can't just say you don't like Pelosi, some proof of corruption is required.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Rockin' Flames

Tort reform would probably be one of the most important pieces that should be passed. One of the big reasons health care costs are so high is that doctors are practicing to cover there own butts down here so that they don't get sued. For example I went to the doctor when I first moved down here for a cold. He gave me chest x-rays, sinus x-rays, blood test, etc. which is compared to when I would go to a doctor in Canada I wouldn't get any of those tests.

Doctors bill for services. More services=more money.

The tort reform argument generally applies to malpractice insurance rates, which in certain areas are indeed pretty high. But I doubt very much if tort reform would result in much cost savings in the American health care system. It's kind of a trickle-down argument, and it depends on doctors (some of whom are already billing to the max, as you point out) passing on the savings to consumers, just out of the goodness of their hearts.

[Rockin' Flames]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

He gave you all those tests so he could charge you for them, not to cover his ass.

Both parties are tied to special interest that's true, but one party is completely tied and one is partially tied. I already went over that in one of my posts. The only Republicans who aren't tied to special interests are Ron Paul and, I think, Rand Paul. Pelosi and the house passed the Public Option which would be real reform and really hurt the insurance companies. So how exactly is that corrupt or tied to special interests? You can't just say you don't like Pelosi, some proof of corruption is required.

I don't doubt he gave me the tests so he could charge me for them, but docs generally do still run more tests in the US then in Canada and there are more lawsuits in the US against doctors in the US than in Canada.

As for the public option, I'm not sure which bill you looked at but the public option was eliminated before passage and just replaced with a requirement of everyone in the US to buy insurance.

Okay I admit I don't have proof that Pelosi is corrupt or tied to special interests. As a matter of fact I don't have proof that all the politicians are tied to special interests (I simply suspect they are), but would sure love to see your proof for each member of the Republican party that is tied to special interests.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Rockin' Flames

Tort reform would probably be one of the most important pieces that should be passed. One of the big reasons health care costs are so high is that doctors are practicing to cover there own butts down here so that they don't get sued.

As someone who works in the medical establishment, I can tell you that this is false.

In the US, doctors run exams primarily for reimbursement, not to save themselves from liability.

Texas has tort reform, and their costs aren't going down. In fact, the piece by Atul Gawande showing the dysfunction in the system used two clinics in Texas as its setting. A recent report showed that medical liability accounted for ~2.5% of medical spending. This is not where the significant problem lies.

[Azure]

Still doesn't mean that tort reform should be left out. Doctors should have the peace of mind of knowing if they do their best job, they won't be sued.

The 2.5% number sounds right though. Pretty sure I have seen that somewhere before.

Personally I think healthcare should be a state issue with a federal guideline of somekind similar to what Canada has. Variety of different ways to make it work. One only has to look at different European countries who have pretty decent healthcare systems.

[Azure]

Also, I think there comes a point when the US needs to seriously sit down and decide to reform a lot of different things from the ground up.

Their healthcare system is a lot like the tax code. Awesome if you're rich, sucks if you're poor. I suspect a lot of things are like that.