And nobody wants to talk about the fact that 6 to 8 % of one's paycheck will be taken out in payroll taxes to pay for only HALF of your expected out of pockets for the year.

This is current rate, no cost savings. With a mandate, unconstitutional.

State run TV is now in full swing. Haven't heard from Howard Dean, Bernie Sanders or Wendell Potter lately. Why didn't the president meet with Wendell? This is pure incompetence and not performing "due diligence" getting the facts.

State Run TV has Ed on The Ed Show bullying congressmen and trying to guilt them into rubber stamping the senate bill.

Shame on Ed and anyone who tows the Whitehose line.

STATE RUN MEDIA

Dear Charlie,

GREETINGS FROM THE LABOR MOVEMENT: THE FOLKS WHO BROUGHT YOU THE WEEKEND.....

What don't you like about being a member of Labor Union? (I presume this is what we're referring to.) Is it the eight hour days and the 40 hour weeks? The overtime pay? The paid vacations and paid holidays? Your health plan? Your pension plan? The higher wages Unions negotiate through collective bargaining? Protection from unfair firings? Safety and health protection on the job? Fairness in promotion and job assignments? Sick leave?

Martin, none of the above. It is the protection of the lazy and stupid, it is the fact that I have had to go around them to succeed because they favor their drinking buddies. It is their threats of and even actual violence inflicted on people. It is the rediculous demands far beyond the ones You name. It is the idea of being forced into joining anything. It is that they take my money and support candidates and ideas that I do not. It is that they have forced companies to resort to foreign manufacturing tomake a profit. Damn, I know I'm forgatting much! Once again I do't think this could be all unions, just the ones I have been in so far.

Don't forget the high union dues that they use for political campaigns of their choosing.  Forced political contributions to, let’s see, the Democrats?  So, who owns who here? Andy Stern of the SEIU is at the Whitehouse more than Obama.  What about the fact that they make it easy to get in and hard to get out.  They basically extort money from employers.  They use salting tactics to force companies and people to join.  They force companies to take their jobs overseas.  They use union workers money for lawyers to sue other companies that don’t want to be unionized.  Here is a link to some common union issues.

http://www.nrtw.org/

Nostalgia for the past and hopes for a new Gilded Age, these are the Republican party's American Dream. So busy fantasizing about what they could be or what ought to be, that they're all asleep at the switch. Consequently, we are living in a polarized state where the rugged individualist rides against the forces of change,where french fries become freedom fries and the disgruntled make their point by complaining, "We don't want to live like Europeans."

At the end of WWII, 35% of the American workforce was unionized. Babies boomed in a rising middle class that made America the envy of the world. The theme of the new social contract was a "fair days pay for a fair days work." It made possible the living wage necessary to the 'American standard of living.'

Henry Ford once said, "You will find men who want to be carried on the shoulders of others, who think that the world owes them a living. They don't seem to see that we must all lift together and pull together." The unions added to this, "and prosper together." The industrialist's creed that common men were basically lazy and complacent and that solidarity among these common men would only make them worse was seen for what it was, an elitist's ploy calcualted to frustrate a successful labor movement. Indeed, the working family's desire to make money and spend it, to work and consume, was the new diving force of the American economy. It even had its own index.

The came Reagan. Wages would steady decline. The working poor would become a norm. Wealth disparities would grow. The attack on the middle class was in full bloom. The financial sector would eventually become the economy.

You're seriously delusional.  You my friend are the one living in the past.  Henry Ford must have seen a glimpse into the future and was speaking about the Democrat Party.  It's not the Conservatives, or Moderates, looking for handouts.  That's what your party breeds and that's the only reason they survive.  Like unions, they promote entitlement.  I guess all the hard working people in this country are illegals and union workers.  That's hysterical.  Wake up, the reason this country lost textiles and industrial work is because the companies get taxed to death.  Your party loves tax.  People have forgotten how bad it is to have the Democrats in charge.  They are starting to get a glimpse now and they don't like it.  Old Democrats should actually become Republicans because the party now is closer to what the Democrats once were.  The Democrat party, as well as the Republican party, has slid too far left but you're in for a rude awakening next election.

Rob,

I would appreciate it if you tried to focus on making cogent arguments for your point of view rather than dumping on me with ad homenim attacks.  We can always agree to disagee civilly. 

With their recent ruling, five Reupblican appointees to the Supreme court have placed the republic in serious danger. It is time to strip corporate personhood once and for all. In the mean time, all politicians should be required to wear uniforms similar to that as seen in NASCAR, so we will know all their corporate sponsors. It would certainly make voting easier.

Or perhaps you think my assessment is too much to the left?

All I hear from you is an attempt to absolve Republicans of any fundamental responsibility for the county's current financial debacle, for the lack of jobs, for illegals who are shipped across the border by the busloads to work in meat processing plants, etc. 

Your Party is about tax breaks for the super rich and the neverending search for cheap labor abroad. Nothing burns a Republican manager's ass more than knowing the employees are taking home wages and a benefit package that's worth half the manager's salary.

As for entitlement programs, it was your Party that created Medicare Part D. The largest expansion of government entitlements since LBJ's Great Society. And on top of that, Republcans refused to let Medicare negotitate the cost of drugs with providers creating huge windfall profits for big pharma. Big fans of corporate giveaways, agribusiness subsidies, big oil, Wall Street, deregulation and privitization, Republicans honestly believe they are the advocates of meritocracy when, in fact, their fondest desire is a world where reward and legitimacy is based upon the possession of wealth.

I think my arguments are perfectly reasonable so please spare me the Liberal semantics.  Pointing out that you’re delusional is by no means an attack, it was merely summing up my opinion of your post.  You have a very unhealthy view of the country and many people in it.  You equate everything bad in your life to the Republican Party.  You harbor a great deal of animosity toward anyone appearing to be well off.  You blame managers, corporations, basically anything with a white collar.  You say Republicans are the fans of banks and Wall Street.  Why don’t you take a little peak at Obama’s campaign contributors?  Let’s see if you can recognize any of these names.  Pfizer, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Law firms, all Unions, Blue Cross…I could go on.  With everything going on in the country the man spent $729,519,581.00 to get elected.  Let’s not point at where all the money is coming from and who’s getting what.  I could get elected with all that money and I’d have a hell of a lot more experience and a lot less shady affiliates. Of course I’m not black, and as you said earlier, your party wants to vote for blacks and women.  Well, I guess we’ve hijacked this thread enough.

Rob,

Are you a truth sayer? You don'even know me and yet, from across cyberspace, you woud read my mind.

Vested wealthy interests have no bigger fan than today's Republican Party. (Your pissin' and moanin' about labor unions gives me the distinct impression you're part of their base.)

Given the fact that no politician can get elected without large sums of money, I suppose we could call all of them whores.

Not to long ago, most people in the Republican Party were Democrats before LBJ foisted desegregation on their genteel society. Before LBJ, none of them wanted to be party to that "nigger lovin'" Lincoln.

The recent Supreme Court's decision was lauded by Senate leader Mitch McConnell (KY) House leader John Boehner (OH). As far as I'm concerned, these two bastards and the Party they represent are dangerous. The last time history got a good taste of their Sunshine philosophy was in Italy.

“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”
Benito Mussolini
 
This one's for you bud.
http://www.sunshinerepublicans.org/

["This one's for you bud.
http://www.sunshinerepublicans.org/"]

Thanks?

Still livin' out the cold war...

Andrea, I'm not condemning all unions. The one I'm in however, and many more, protect the lazy and stupid. That is not My main complaint though. I have come to expect that unfortunately. The problem is that I, nor any other union member is entitled to this bribe. Hard working non-union workers deserve the same deal. This is a shameful attempt to force people into unions that do not wish to join.

I hope You are right Mike, but I don't think this group in Washington cares what the American people want.

Charlie, I believe that.  Doesn't Barney Frank have a hand in the whole mortgage fiasco as well?  Of course he doesn't have to face any consequences for that. 

Rob, if I could figure out how Barney does it, I'd take up a life of crime!

We in Mass are not exactly voting against Coakley. She is liked and respected here. We are voting Brown because of the current health care plan. The bribe to exempt unions from paying tax on their healthcare plans. The cost of it. The rediculous "stimulus plans". The bank bailouts. The auto company bailouts. Most of all it's because we no longer heard by or represented by our "representatives". When We start a grass roots movement to get our message out we are ignored, ridiculed, called racists, rednecks, and every name in the book. All We want is to be heard! Re: healthcare, why are we not trying simple things first like trans state/national ins. purchase, tort reform, asset protection laws trans state/national drug purchase legality.

...And the American people will stand up and take notice more than what was ever seen as some kinf of a Mass reforendom.  Wait till this fall!  Americans will speak with votes.

Elaine, that's only scratching the surface.

Elaine, it's not the virtues of Brown that are causing his victory. It could be Atilla the Hun running, it wouldn't matter. Mass is 2 to 1 dems, and they are now showing their teeth.

This is a good strategic move for progressive voters who have been ignored for a year by congress and Obama. This is a chess move to stop them from passing corrupt legislation that is written for their corporate overlords.

Neither party is immune from these practices, apparently. Scott Brown is no saviour, he's just in the right place at the right time and this is a wakeup call for dems. That's all.

He can't do any harm in the minority, just a chess piece.

You can be checkmated by a lowly pawn and you may want to wise up to that fact.

The most important thing Scott can do, he has done. A message was sent. Unfortunately from what I hear so far, The idiots are once again ignoring or misunderstanding the message. "hey stupid! this is not the change we voted you in  for!"

no insult to the president intended, just paraphrasing liberal protesters during Bush 1 days. Funny hoe that was okay but when We protest this president we are rednecks, racists, or teabaggers!

p.s. in light of Jeff Foxworthy and his daughters' work in Haiti and elsewhere, I think "redneck" just became a badge of honor! good work Jeff!

The United States is comprised of 50 fiefdoms. I expect that if nothing in the way of progessive health care reform comes out of the federal government, we will see it realized in the more progressive States. Again, I take an evolutionary view.

More regressive Republican states will continue to tinker with the status quo.

God had nothing to do with it.

For all the Democratic Party's faults, (and its faults are its many moderates) it is still the more progressive Party. Instead of listening to what politicans profess, look rather at their pragmatic results. For this we can do a little thought experiment.

Which Party was most likely to get a black man elected to the Presidency?  It's the same Party that is most likely to get a woman elected to the Presidency! ... It's the Democractic Party!  True, many Democrats remain compromised by the usual suspects. However, Dems still have many progressives to meet their current challenges.

Which party is more likely to elect qualified African american? Which Party is more likely to elect a qualified woman? Which party will throw disgusting slurs at them like "oreo", or try to convice people they are bubble headed idiots? Finally, what party freed Arican Americans from the shackles of slavery that democrats held them in?

The Party of Lincoln and the Party of George W. Bush are worlds apart.

As for Republicans electing a qualified African American or a  woman, all I have to say is Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda...

As for Michael Steele, he would not be GOP Chaiman if Barack Obama were not President. i.e. Michael Steele is to the Republican Party what Token is to South Park.

Don,t be too sure We might yet elect the first qualified african american. Ask any republican how they about Condi or Alan Keyes

Martin, how exactly are we republicans racist? What racist law did we pass? What racist law did we try to pass? Before you cite the civil rights act or the voter rights acts you better check your facts. before you cite KKK you better check and see what party was under those hoods! Jim Crowe laws? passed by by democrats! Still, there must be something we did and I would want to know. My parents were republican and civil rights supporters and so were all the repubs in their group. I do not want to lend my support to a racist organisation so please fill me in.

Martin, do a little homework on the Democratic Party and racism.  You may be surprised.   

Martin has a bit of a right to assume racism because the mainstream media is tagging the republicans with the tea party mantle, and we all can see what their signs say. We can all see there are just white people in the crowds and that they use "code" to hide thier bigotry.

Thank goodness that's not the whole republican party. They will be shunned like Birchers as history is written, but for now, what a nice shield for the corporate dems and corrupt rethugs? eh?

It's good cop, bad cop, the oldest trick in the book. The republicans are out and out for special interest, the dems PRETEND they aren't. That's the only diff between them.

"Imagine Obama trying to make [lack of] healthcare [insurance] a crime.. "

And yet, it would seem less a crime than to let another die for lack of health care.

Men have long seen virtue in duty and giving up some freedoms for a greater good. It, as always, depends on what's a stake and the extent of our solidarity.

By "any insurance" I am referring to some but not enough suitable health insurance to cover catastrophic life or death. 

"..... it's about control over everyone's lives," ... Paranoid?

".. and the Government takeover of the insurance companies,"...

I was thinking more along the lines of making them non-profit uitilties.

The banks were bailed out with our taxpayer dollars being deemed "too big to fail." In that sense, the banks own you, me, and the government.

The auto companies were lent money to keep their local economies from collapsing and their employees at work.

"I was thinking more along the lines of making them non-profit uitilties."

Try a monopoly. It's all profit, everybody gets screwed. Once the insurance companies think they have it good, they will learn that there is a price to pay. Like all of the companies that accepted the bailouts.

You're spot on Jimbo.  I was just too tired last night to continue ranting.  This has nothing to do with healthcare and everything to do with Socialism.  What does the government run well?

Free markets are the greatest economic engine in the world.. Nonetheless, anyone who would insist that every economic activity must be entirely or even principally private or capitalistic in nature does so from an ideological rather than a pragmatic stance. Markets are not the answer to everything just as money is not the answer to everything.

That people can organize in an amongst themselves toward the attainment of goals on behalf of their communities to provide water, sewer, garbage, law enforcement, fire departments, schools, libraries, parks, roads, health departments, land management, etc., in no way threatens the significance of free markets. Similarly, having a national health insurance system in no way threatens advances in medicine or access to quality care as has been proved by other countries whose value for human life would apparently exceed ours.

Well you're partially correct with some of your statements.  National healthcare would and does in fact change the dynamics of receiving quality care.  Why do you think people come here from other countries to get health care? The U.S.A is the greatest country in the world.  To be blunt, I could care less what other countries are doing.   Unlike unions, you're free to leave if you want.

"...having a national health insurance system in no way threatens advances in medicine or access to quality care as has been proved by other countries whose value for human life would apparently exceed ours."

Are you serious?

The only thing I'll gladly leave is Rob's wonderland of American supremacy.

By the way, we're number 37!

http://healthcare.change.org/blog/view/american_health_care_is_number_37_and_proud

Mike,

You doubt it?

We are number 37 maybe in access. Quality of care # 1. Medical breakthroughs #1, technological development #1, pharmaceutical development #1

Mr. Bring and all - 

Of course I doubt it.  There is no doubt.  Compare the advances in medicine in the private sector to that of government programs.  Profit is not the problem.  It's a third party uninterested payer (insurer and government).  Transferring the money from several payers (big insurance) to a single payer (government) doesn't solve the 3rd party payer ... it exacerbates it.

Consider this from Medical Progress Today:

http://www.medicalprogresstoday.com/spotlight/spotlight_indarchive.php?id=1696

"The evidence is unmistakable: Europe's pharmaceutical industry is in the midst of a long and steady decline, and Europe's bio–tech industry is lagging significantly behind its American counterpart. What is also clear—but far more controversial—is that by adopting certain aspects of the American R&D system, Europeans could regain their innovative and competitive edge.

Some of the key ingredients of America's thriving biopharmaceutical sector: a system of free pricing of drugs (almost inconceivable in Europe); great dynamism in the bio–tech sector due to a pool of active venture capital; direct–to–consumer advertising of prescription drugs; flexible labor laws and an entrepreneurial spirit; an active and often symbiotic connection between academic scientists and private industry; and a limited role of the state in the R&D process, with private R&D preferred over the large–scale sponsoring of research by the state."

Aditional information from that article:

"Access to new drugs, for instance, is far superior for American consumers than European ones. For cancer patients, access to new drugs is crucial: a report by the Swedish Karolinska Institute, published in the Annals of Oncology, found that "The United States has been the country of first launch for close to half of the oncology drugs brought to the market in the past 11 years." The authors of the report observe that "Nearly half of the observed improvement in the 2–year cancer survival rate between 1992 and 2000 at 50 US cancer centers could be attributed to the use of new cancer drugs," evidence that America's embrace of new medicines translates into saved human lives."

Folks, if it weren't for the American medical system, the other socialized nations would have little incentive to improve their system, and there would be MUCH LESS medical innovation.

Mike said, "Some of the key ingredients of America's thriving biopharmaceutical sector: blah blah blah.... "

You forgot the DOD, the largest federal sponsor of basic research and the third largest sponsor of academic basic research. The DOD budget is a direct wealth transfer from you and me, the taxpayers, to private interests ....  to keep America no. 1, of course... And biotech is the DOD's new darling. But hey, it's for a good cause!

As for European drug companies being in decline, any article that freely asserts it can be contradicted by another than freely denies it.

The claim that the American phamacuetical industry is tops boils down to this: "Yes, prescription drugs are expensive, but that shows how valuable they are. Besides, our research and development costs are enormous, and we need to cover them somehow. As 'research-based' companies, we turn out a steady stream of innovative medicines that lengthen life, enhance its quality, and avert more expensive medical care. You are the beneficiaries of this ongoing achievement of the American free enterprise system, so be grateful, quit whining, and pay up."

Only 8% of pharmaceutical research funding comes from all govt. sources put together. 92% from private sources.

The pharmaceutical industry is hardly a model of American free enterprise. To be sure, it is free to decide which drugs to develop (me-too drugs instead of innovative ones, for instance), and it is free to price them as high as the traffic will bear, but it is utterly dependent on government-granted monopolies -- in the form of patents and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) -- approved exclusive marketing rights. If it is not particularly innovative in discovering new drugs, it is highly innovative - and aggressive - in dreaming up ways to extend its monopoly rights.

Never mind the benefits gotten from publicly funded universities whose pharmaceutical research and policy programs provide graduate and external training on health care technologies, drugs, diagnostics, and medical devices.

The overall goal of these universities' basic research is provide evidence that improves health care decisions for patients, clinicians, payers, and the profits of industry.

According to Marcia Angell, author of 'Drug Companies & Doctors': An Exchange, there is nothing peculiarly American about this industry. It is the very essence of a global enterprise. Roughly half of the largest drug companies are based in Europe. (The exact count shifts because of mergers.) In 2002, the top ten were the American companies Pfizer, Merck, Johnson & Johnson, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Wyeth (formerly American Home Products); the British companies GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca; the Swiss companies Novartis and Roche; and the French company Aventis (which in 2004 merged with another French company, Sanafi Synthelabo, putting it in third place). All are much alike in their operations. All price their drugs much higher here than in other markets.

      These topics have been addressed time and time again in this forum on health care reform. Nonetheless, whereas Republicans decry a takeover by government of health care, I believe the issue of health care reform is part and parcel to the larger issue of who is running our government.

    Health care reform is not about government control of our lives, its about people like you and me taking control of our government and making it work for us. The alternative, should reform fail, is literally business as usual.. letting corporate America run the government and, by extension, our lives and future. I want a government that's for the people and by the people, not a nation of shopkeepers, for big business and by big business.

    As I've pointed out elsewhere, health care reform is just another battle between Wall Street and Main Street. Wall Street remains very adept at pulling the wool over people's eyes -- even though its street cred right now is at an all time low because of the bank bailout.

    Wall Street is trying to hang on to its biggest cash cows, big pharma and health insurance. It doesn't care how many Americans die, it doesn't care how many go bankrupt, it doesn't care about the uninsured or the under-insured as under-insurance is its new product line.

Jimbo,

Take the red pill and fall down the rabbit hole of big government conspiracy theory. Where Rush Limbaugh is the Queen of Hearts, Glen Beck is Humpty Dumpty, and Bill O' is the Cheshire Cat.

I'm probably being unfair to you.  :-)

At some point conservatives decided, based on demographics and perhaps the existing general bigotries of their most hardcore supporters, that their ideas could no longer stand even minor scrutiny unless they were couched in terms of urgent disaster. They may have gone too far. It is not clear, at this point, whether or not the the American psyche will buy even a more measured message from the regressive right. Who wants to see their progeny live in a world that has sold out to corporate interests? After all that and that alone is what progressives loath most. Sure, there will always be those who would impose either a liberal or conservative Nanny State. But that is not the question before us on this issue of health care reform.

President Obama has stated, in no uncertain terms, the necessity of changing an unsustainable health care system. And he has proposed a seemingly timid and controversial solution. But the real questions are: Do Americans think the health insurance industry is serving them well? The answer is generally no. Is it good policy to make Americans pay five to twenty times more for their medications than people in the U.K. Germany, France, Australia, Japan, etc.? Most Americans say no. Should a three day hospital stay cost 18 grand? Most Americans say no. Should medical students graduate so far in debt it takes them 10 years to get out of it? Most Americans say no. Doctors ask: Can Labor and Industries claims and insurance be model for tort reform. The answer is yes..

Lastly, many Americans ask: Is the health insurance industry antiquated? Many Americans say yes. They would rid this country of the health insurance industry in favor of a single payer system. Are they liberals for that? Not necessarily. Many of them are good Christian folk with otherwise conservative views who, nevertheless, believe it's a good thing to be your bother's keeper. If that's not "politically feasible," we can always use health insruance companies as just another public utility.

We need to reform our health care system, Jimbo.

Personally I'm sick and tired of the fearmongering and use of fake emergencys dreamed up by the democrats in order to pass nonsense legislation. Then to have a liberal liar try to turn it aound? It's their oldest trick. They are truly a bunch of dirtbags.

Rob,

On a personal note, do you carry health insurance? And if so, through whom?

I could see where this is going.  Yes, I have insurance but it's irrelevant with who.

Do you pay for it out of pocket or get it through your employer?

The reason I ask is because employer based coverage will collapse in a few short years as health insurance costs continue to rise at near double digit rates. This will leave most people searching for health insurance in the individual market. There they will find health insurance plans with premiums well over $1000 a month for a family of four, a $5000 deductable with a $15,000 a year out of pocket limit. And those will be the cheap plans. A back-breaker for people with chronic conditions.

I've already answered this in a post above.  I agree some reform is needed but it must start with the government lifting the restrictions they are currently imposing on the health care industry.  As mentioned, allowing competition across state lines.  Until that happens, I don't want to hear anything about a health care bill.

Rob,

The topic of health insurers selling their products across State lines is being addressed here

Health Care Reform on the Ropes -- Again

The link is broken

I'm liking your pic! :) Also, you are CORRECT sir! :)