|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044
Hall of Famer
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044 |
I know i have had a few doozies to some the last few days, as Ammo said "i am on a tear"  ..that was just my tinfoil hat at its finest This however is a serious question i want tos sk and i want folks opinions on it. why has the mainstream media been on this tirade recently of Demonizing American companies and corporations? i just don't understand this. I am NOT rich. I am an average hard working American like the rest of you folks on this board. I don't sit on a board of directors, i don't drive a 200,000 dollar company car around, i am just a working joe. For example all this that going on about Anthem and Health Insurance companies. I know it sucks they had to raise their rates, but the costs of medical care has gone up, many people dropped their premiums in the last year, so Anthem is most likely cutting corners too and had no choice but to raise rates. I see Congress the other day asked them to just pretty much "eat" a 30% cost increase to provide services. i mean please help me out here, why should this company run itself like congress does? (completely Bankrupt with a multi-trillion dollar debt) just so it can provide health insurance for awhile before it ends up like GM? I thought the goal of a company was to "turn a profit" right? a company is in business to make money and hire employees. i just don't understand why they are Demonizing companies in the media, and many americans agree with these sentiments. We can even look at Toyota for example...Even though Toyota is a foreign company, they have bee Demonized in the main stream media. I believe toyota had a manufacturing defect that just got past Q&A due to human error...no one talks about the other thousands od defects they found and fixed before it was released though.... I mean Toyota has agreed to fix the cars....do we really need all this other nonsense? The families that had loved ones hurt or killed by these defects can take these case to court and privately litigate their own agreements...that is something for the Courts....Let people litigate this privately so they can be justly compensated on their own accord. I just think this whole "hate the american company because it turns a profit" ideology in the news is getting borderline nuts... Even though I don't agree with today's banking system, i can understand why many credit card interest rates went up...A study has shown that Quote:
Average credit card debt per household-- regardless of whether they have a credit card or not -- was $8,329 at the end of 2008
The average outstanding credit card debt for households that have a credit card was $10,679 at the end of 2008. One year earlier, that average was $10,637. (Source: Nilson Report, April 2009)
The average balance per open credit card -- including both retail and bank cards -- was $1,157 at the end of 2008. That's up from $1,033 at the end of 2006, a growth of nearly 11 percent in two years. (Source: Experian marketing insight snapshot, March 2009)
http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-n...istics-1276.php
So the banks were getting a little nervous because people's intrest payments were just growing and growing and people just kept charging and charging, many after they got laid off from work, and much of this came after many many many people defaulted on their credit cards....the banks got nervous because they were getting stuck on credit they extended...or figured they were going to get suck.
As I said I do not "agree" with the credit card companies raising their rates, but I can kinda understand why they did it....
I had a little over a 2,000 dollars of college debt on a capital one card, they raised my interest rate up in the high 20% so I took the money out of my savings account and promptly paid it off, a few days later, they called me back and put my interest rate back down where it was..the lady on the phone admitted to me they were nervous about people being able to pay...
again these Credit Card companies are trying to turn a profit...maybe rate hikes wouldn't have happened if people didn't charge so much...I had saved that money for the last two years and was getting ready to pay it off anyways when they hiked it...but I won't put myself in that position again....
i know many people couldn't pay theirs off, however I question why they charge their card up to an amount they can't pay off?
I guess the whole jist of this post is..
do you feel its fair that they are Demonizing these companies on the news?
do you see companies as evil if they are turning a profit? (it sure seems the news does)
do you think its fair that Congress tells these companies to operate the same way they do (at a loss stockpiling trillions of dollars of debt?)
I thought the idea of a company or a corporation was to provide a product or service for a market price and turn a profit?
is it fair to tell an insurance company to sell a product at below market value( at a huge loss) in order to satisfy those who don't understand that the prices are actually a reflection of what the market demands?
There is no utopia soceity where everyone has equal access to everything..it just doesn't work..look at the breadlines in the soviet Union...everyone there had equal access...it didn't work out so well did it?
Please I would love to hear thoughts...I promise i won't call anyone sheeple (It was funny, but I was only kidding..if anyone took offense to that comment in the other post, I apologize)
what are the answers to these questions...is it fair to Demonize a profit turning company?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Well first off the media tends to have a left leaning bias and that demonization of the companies helps their cause of keeping the appearance of being "for the working man".
Secondly I caught short snippet of Olberman blasting the one insurance company because they made a profit of 7%(I admit I did not catch the entire thing so I could have innaccuracies) Well the 7% number wasn't touted as much BUT the $2 billion or some other sizeable number was the issue. My first thought was...what is NBC's profit margin...looking into it NBC is owned by GE whose profit margin was 7.29% or 23 Billion dollars...which was down from 29 billion in 2008 which was down from 72.5 billion in 2007 But I did not hear him berating his own company......
Lastly...because we see too often unscrupulous moves by people in power...the Bernie Madoffs, the Enrons, etc....there is reason enought to distrust them there...so some can be brought upon themselves...
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,180
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,180 |
The same reason that they demonize the "Rich". They're an easy target.
They have, and everybody wants. Make them the bad guy and we can start making a case that they don't need all that they have, we can take some of it.
It also creates a villain, a focus for the ire of the people.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Quote:
The same reason that they demonize the "Rich". They're an easy target.
They have, and everybody wants. Make them the bad guy and we can start making a case that they don't need all that they have, we can take some of it.
It also creates a villain, a focus for the ire of the people.
Correct.
And unfortunately, too many ignorant people look and see "oh, company A made a billion dollars - those bad people", and they forget that company A employs 6,000, or 14,000 people.
They forget that if a company isn't making a profit, the company gets rid of jobs.
They don't see that company A has put billions more on the line in order to make their profit.
Like you said - they see an easy target, all the while being ignorant as to what that company contributes in taxes and jobs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102 |
I can't say whether or not the "demonizing" is over-or-under done. Perhaps they deserve more but the mainstream media is forced to hold back since American companies provide the media with advertising dollars that are their bread-and-butter.
For example, I reckon every state has an insurance commission that oversees the conduct of the insurance industry within their state. Out of all the states, I wonder how many of these commissions are comprised of industry insiders in comparison to those controlled by consumer advocates? With all the dough Nationwide, State Farm, All State, Prudential, etc spend on media ads, do we get a fair assessment of the business? Beats me.
You assume it is over-done. I see it more from an angle that these companies have far greater access to the power of the government than ordinary citizens have. If I patronize a company I would prefer that they not use the dough to influence government to limit their liabilitites and restrict my rights. But isn't enriching and protecting itself a responsibility the corporation has to its stockholders?
So why are they demonized? I think the obvious answer is that we've seen that power corrupts.
Last edited by Reckon; 02/25/10 01:40 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246 |
yet everyone plays the lottery and mega millions right?
I think the media in general has lost most semblance of journalism and it's all about profit not art and certainly not journalistic integrity. And yes I said profit. They want viewers and readers to justify what they charge advertisers. Strangeness.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,317
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,317 |
I personally haven't seen the media demonize any company that is only "guilty" of turning a profit. I have seen them demonize companies that turn a profit by shady means, and whats the problem with that? Though admittedly I don't pay much attention to the media and I don't watch much tv.
I just know that Enron deserved to be demonized, so do the banks who just took a bunch of our tax dollars to keep from going under and then turned around and gave out fat bonuses to the executives who almost put them under. I don't see why its an issue to have negative feelings for companies who certainly earned it.
What companies are being demonized in the media that are honest companies making an honest buck? If that's going on, then I think you have a point. Give some examples for us to talk about.
edit: meant to click on Knight of Brown, not you, sorry
Last edited by Mattack; 02/25/10 02:08 AM.
"All I know is, as long as I led the Southeastern Conference in scoring, my grades would be fine." - Charles Barkley
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
For starters, media NEEDS something to talk about, and Tiger Woods story is getting old.
Media NEEDS negative stories because they capture viewers better than "cutest baby" stories.
Media doesn't have time to truly investigate a story or facts, as they all want to be the first to report something.
People will notice the guy beating his wife on the side of the road, before they notice the young man helping an elderly lady change her flat tire, we as a society like to watch others lives come apart, it makes us feel better about our own.
I liken it to people will complain that their service at a restaurant is poor, but many will never make a point of complimenting the server or management when it is good. And I don't mean just leaving a nice tip, because management finds out that you had a poor experience, but do they know when you had a good one? I often write small compliments on my receipt when I have had good service.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
So the banks were getting a little nervous because people's intrest payments were just growing and growing and people just kept charging and charging, many after they got laid off from work, and much of this came after many many many people defaulted on their credit cards....the banks got nervous because they were getting stuck on credit they extended...or figured they were going to get suck.
As I said I do not "agree" with the credit card companies raising their rates, but I can kinda understand why they did it....
I had a little over a 2,000 dollars of college debt on a capital one card, they raised my interest rate up in the high 20% so I took the money out of my savings account and promptly paid it off, a few days later, they called me back and put my interest rate back down where it was..the lady on the phone admitted to me they were nervous about people being able to pay...
again these Credit Card companies are trying to turn a profit...maybe rate hikes wouldn't have happened if people didn't charge so much...I had saved that money for the last two years and was getting ready to pay it off anyways when they hiked it...but I won't put myself in that position again....
i know many people couldn't pay theirs off, however I question why they charge their card up to an amount they can't pay off?
I guess the whole jist of this post is..
do you feel its fair that they are Demonizing these companies on the news?
Let me address this part first... If a bank gave me a credit card with a $10,000 limit and a 9% interest rate and I charged it up to $3K... 5K... 8K.... but never once missed a payment. Then it is my opinion that they have absolutely NO RIGHT to hike my interest rate just because they "got nervous". I understand it is in the fine print that they do technically have "the right" to do it... but we had an agreement, they would let me use a revolving card with X limit, charge me Y interest rate, and I would not go over that limit and I would make at least minimum monthly payments. So I'm sorry, if I'm keeping up my end of the basis of that agreement, then I think they are total crap piles to use some other clause which allows them to jack up my interest rate because OTHER PEOPLE aren't making their payments.
If you loaned $1000 to your brother or a friend with the deal that they would pay you back in 6 months, then his company started laying people off, would you go back and say... "Hey, I know you've borrowed money from me before and always paid me back just like you said you would but.... your company isn't doing very well and ... well, I also loaned $500 to Jack and he's now out of a job so he's not going to be able to pay me back and...uh... you might get let go soon... so.. uh... I'm going to need you to repay me $1200 so I can recoup my losses that you had nothing to with and just so I can feel better."???? That is a crappy thing to do and I don't care if you are friends or if its just a business deal and that's what the credit cards are doing...
Also consider this, because of he legislation passed: 1. The banks (or a lot of them anyway) were doing this with money that wasn't even theirs, it was tax payer money that they were using to lend to you and then jacking up your rates on tax payer money... not only that, they had the rate at which they borrow money from the government reduced so they were paying LESS to borrow money than they ever had in the past yet jacking up YOUR rates to borrow it from them...
I don't blindly demonize corporate America or rich people, I don't think they "owe" me anything other than what we have agreed to if we are doing business together, I also don't blindly sit by and think they all have my best interest at heart and that what they are doing is right just to squeek by with a profit... because banks have the highest profit % of all industrys... If I signed up for a 19% credit card a few years ago, then I should have to live with that.... but if I signed up for a 9% credit card a few years ago that just became a 19% credit card because OTHER PEOPLE couldn't pay their debts.. well that's wrong.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828 |
Quote:
For example all this that going on about Anthem and Health Insurance companies.
knight...the fact that Anthem recently raised their premiums for healthcare by 39% might have something to do with it.
When was the last time you received a 39% increase or even a 10% increase in your pay?
You need to look past the profits of the Anthem and look at what will be the results of their actions. The fact is, many people will not be able to afford Anthem's raise in premiums and will be forced to drop their coverage. While Antham racks in their profits, what happens to the people with no health insurance?
This but one example of why our country needs healthcare reform, IMO.
Toyota has had an issue with their cars suddenly accelerating for the last "decade" and it appears, they still have the problem.
Toyota has been pushing this issue down the road that long and still has the problem...they need to look in the mirror because the way the addressed the issue, not correcting it, has lead to a much bigger issue now.
YES...we do "need all this other nonsense"?
Banks...they are borrowing money from the Gov. for 1% interest or less and turning around and charging 20% interest on credit card borrowing...sorry, but there seem to be something a little dishonest when we begin to talk about the tactics and policies of some banks.
I guess you need to understand that some companies and corporations do not have the American peoples interests and safety as a priority and sometimes we average Joes need the help of our elected officials to take on corporate giants such as Toyota, banks or health insurance companies.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
The credit card company has the right to raise your interest rate because you agreed to it. If you don't like the terms, don't sign the contract.
Each and every one of us works to make a profit, companies do the same thing. We are all free to choose to seek other employment, and with whom we do business.
I believe anyone has the right and freedom not to work if they so choose. I also believe they have the right to starve to death. They do NOT have the right to take food from my table to sustain themselves.
Demonizing those who are well off is nothing new, thousands of years of history demonstrate this. There are always those who will convince a large crowd that this wealth has been accumulated unfairly, and should be taken from them and re-distributed. This invariably results in most folks being worse off, with the exception of the folks giving the speech to the angry mob. Most people who are running factories or other businesses are doing so because they know how to do it effectively. Those who aren't, for the most part, don't.
It is very rarely noted if a wealthy person has worked long and hard hours to achieve what they have gained, and even less often that poor people do not pay many salaries.
I watched my father work very hard to become a millionaire. If you want to know the cost of that achievement, we can have a very long conversation. The short version is I decided long ago to choose a different path.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
You need to look past the profits of the Anthem and look at what will be the results of their actions. The fact is, many people will not be able to afford Anthem's raise in premiums and will be forced to drop their coverage.
No, you DO NOT have to look past the profits of Anthem. mac, we can argue until we are blue in the face but that comment above is the very heart of socialism. I know that's a bad word and usually gets the big "poo poo" when it's used but to say a company should disregard profit and focus on the "greater good" is, by definition, socialism.
Quote:
While Antham racks in their profits, what happens to the people with no health insurance?
Has it ever been confirmed that Anthem is racking in a profit? I know it is widely reported that the parent company is but as a subsidiary, is Anthem profitable?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
Uggh...Knight...Toyota's been covering up a very serious design flaw for nearly a decade.
Toyota was the toast of the media, with GM being the enemy until this broke.
Toyota's being demonized because they knowingly sacrificed their quality and safety for increased profit margins. If Toyota had never sacrificed their commitment to quality and safety, they'd still be the toast of the auto industry.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828 |
Quote:
Quote:
You need to look past the profits of the Anthem and look at what will be the results of their actions. The fact is, many people will not be able to afford Anthem's raise in premiums and will be forced to drop their coverage.
No, you DO NOT have to look past the profits of Anthem. mac, we can argue until we are blue in the face but that comment above is the very heart of socialism. I know that's a bad word and usually gets the big "poo poo" when it's used but to say a company should disregard profit and focus on the "greater good" is, by definition, socialism.
DC...you can conclude that you and I have different priorities and views when it comes to life, politics and the corporate profits of Anthem.
I'm 100% for the blue collar/middle class workers of America...who happen to be the majority in America.
The best thing to happen in the healthcare debate was when Anthem decided to raise their premiums by 39% in California right after congress failed to pass healthcare reform. Then Anthem raised rates in several other states too. Suddenly, the American people got hit right between the eyes with the "reality" of their healthcare expenses, in the future.
This lone act by Anthem gave the American people a look into the future of their own healthcare costs. It sure does not take a rocket scientist to figure out if one HMO raises their rates, the rest will follow.
A common sense look into the what is ahead for most Americans clearly tells us that Americans will be paying more for their healthcare coverage, (company provided healthcare included) if nothing is done. The future for your healthcare needs...at some point, you won't be able to afford healthcare coverage...then what?
How long will it be before your company tells you that they have to raise your share of their healthcare by 39%?...it's coming folks. Don't expect your company to continue to eat HMO increases.
How long before your company says they are moving your job to Mexico where they have universal healthcare and companies do not have to pay the cost of their Mexican employees healthcare coverage.
If you think it can't happen to you...you have your head so far in the sand that you may never see the light of day...it is coming.
I do understand the that some operate with an attitude that "I'm (you) are ok...so, to hell with those who don't have what I (you) have", healthcare coverage in this case. I guess I was raised with different family values that won't allow me to discount my fellow Americans who don't have what I have.
This is the greatest country on this earth and I feel we need to apply ourselves to solve this problem...that will only grow worse as the months pass. Do nothing today...the problem will be that much worse next month and next year...jmho...mac
Quote:
While Antham racks in their profits, what happens to the people with no health insurance?
Has it ever been confirmed that Anthem is racking in a profit? I know it is widely reported that the parent company is but as a subsidiary, is Anthem profitable?
As Anthem Blue Cross sends profit to WellPoint, it plans hefty rate hikes for Californians
February 23, 2010|By Lisa Girion
Health insurance giant Anthem Blue Cross said it was raising rates on thousands of individual policyholders in California because the cost of their medical care exceeded the premiums they paid last year.
At the same time, other parts of Anthem reaped a profit. A Times analysis of the company's regulatory filings shows that $525 million in Anthem's earnings in 2009 was shipped to its corporate parent WellPoint Inc. The analysis' findings were not disputed by Anthem.
Anthem Blue Cross has been so profitable that, since WellPoint acquired it in 2004, it has contributed more than $4.2 billion to the parent company's bottom line.
Critics say some of those gains should have been kept in California and used to cover the losses on Anthem's individual policies. Instead, the company turned to individual policyholders to make up the losses with rate increases of up to 39%.
WellPoint Executive Vice President Brad Fluegel said the company cannot dip into profit from one insurance line to keep another line afloat.
"It's not sustainable to have our premiums be insufficient to pay our claims expenses," he said. To have profit applied to premiums, "you would be under-pricing your product and essentially losing money. In order to have a sustainable and viable business, you have to have your premiums reflect your underlying medical costs."
But some lawmakers say they are aghast. Former California Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi, now a Democratic congressman from Walnut Creek, said it was unconscionable for Anthem to impose steep premium hikes on individuals when the company as a whole was quite profitable.
"The extraordinary greed of Anthem/WellPoint Blue Cross is a clear indication that this company has put profit before people," said Garamendi, who as California insurance commissioner presided over the companies' merger. "People need to be able to get out of the shark pool with a public-option lifeboat."
Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Hillsborough) said it looked as if Anthem and WellPoint were "playing a shell game" to boost their profits and justify rate hikes.
"They are moving all the profits to the holding company," she said. "And then they cry, 'Woe is me. We're not making enough money.' They are just moving the money to hide the jackpot."
Committees of the Legislature and Congress are set to grill Anthem and WellPoint officials this week over the rate hikes' necessity.
web page
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Wow......Those bastards...4.2 billion in 5 years....
GE made 23 BILLION in profits last year alone....in 2007 they made over 72 Billion...why aren't you going nuts over that?
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Guess I thought you were SUPPOSED to make a profit in business. My teachers sucked in school...telling me the wrong info.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,180
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,180 |
Quote:
Wow......Those bastards...4.2 billion in 5 years....
GE made 23 BILLION in profits last year alone....in 2007 they made over 72 Billion...why aren't you going nuts over that?
Because they were one of O's biggest campaign contributors, perhaps?
Or, more likely, because the media hasn't told him to go after them yet.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,890
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,890 |
Quote:
Because they were one of O's biggest campaign contributors, perhaps?
Or, more likely, because the media hasn't told him to go after them yet.
Hmmm,, I was under the impression that Obama didn't take a ton of money from corporations or special interest groups. I thought most if not all of his money came from individuals. a buck here and a buck there.
I could be wrong, but I'd have to see some proof of it I think...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,180
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,180 |
I could well be wrong, but I was under the opposite impression - that he got a fairly good chunk from GE.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
Quote:
Quote:
Because they were one of O's biggest campaign contributors, perhaps?
Or, more likely, because the media hasn't told him to go after them yet.
Hmmm,, I was under the impression that Obama didn't take a ton of money from corporations or special interest groups. I thought most if not all of his money came from individuals. a buck here and a buck there.
I could be wrong, but I'd have to see some proof of it I think...
I would be under the same impression, because we didn't hear about it at all,....you can bet he took a lot of money that we'll never know about. As they all do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431 |
http://www.opensecrets.org/index.phpThis is a pretty cool site that follows the politicians and the money .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
How long before your company says they are moving your job to Mexico where they have universal healthcare and companies do not have to pay the cost of their Mexican employees healthcare coverage.
Right mac.. the companies don't pay for it.. the people don't pay for it.. nobody freakin' pays for it.. it just materializes out of thin freakin' air and everybody in Mexico is afforded the greatest healthcare, that's why the Rio Grande is awash with people streaming over there to live, it's a damn utopia.
Quote:
I do understand the that some operate with an attitude that "I'm (you) are ok...so, to hell with those who don't have what I (you) have", healthcare coverage in this case. I guess I was raised with different family values that won't allow me to discount my fellow Americans who don't have what I have.
mac, then feel free to give them what you have... give them 20% of it, give them 40% of it.. hell give them all of it, I don't care but what makes you think you have the right to give them WHAT I HAVE?
Mac you subscribe to socialist economic principles.. just admit it. Someday down the road, I hope my grandson runs into your grandson as they wait for 4 hours to see the doctor to get a routine exam.... and then wait to schedule the emergency surgery they both need but can't get for 7 months... maybe they'll even start walking back to their government wage mandated job at the government owned production facility... and when that happens, I hope my grandson gives a beatdown of epic proportions to your grandson.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
Quote:
I hope my grandson gives a beatdown of epic proportions to your grandson.
Wow.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Quote:
Quote:
I hope my grandson gives a beatdown of epic proportions to your grandson.
Wow.
He was being nicer than I would've wanted my grandson to be........just saying. 
At some point in time people need to realize the amount this "reform"/mandate will cost.
Anyone hear about the Canadian ......think it was the prime minister - not sure on that - some top level guy in the gov't. of Canada - came to the U.S to have his heart surgery? Why would that be? It was only a few weeks ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
JC..
Let's face it, the health care system as it is, is severely flawed in it's accounting practices. Is this because they want to rip off the paying consumer and/or insurance companies? I don't think so. It is to cover the cost of all those that use the service and then don't or can't pay for it.
Much like shoplifting raises the cost of goods to account for the losses.
How do we fix it? Well, I'm not sure there is an easy solution, but I know allowing the government to run and pay for it isn't going to work. They haven't ever done anything cheaper than the private sector.
We also need to do something about the cost of malpractice insurance and fraudulent lawsuits as well.
Health insurance is a privilege, not a right. And I said insurance, which is what we should return to, and drop the "coverage" concept. I don't mind paying $35 dollars for a doctors visit, if it means my insurance rates are lower. Maybe the folks that go to the doctor on a weekly basis won't like it, in which case they can purchase a "coverage" option for visits.
Over the years we have adopted an umbrella coverage concept, which is a huge drain on the system. It was a great concept when people would visit a doctor only when necessary, but if it only cost $5-$10 to visit why not go because I sneezed this morning? The increase of people making doctor visits has had to increase over the years, and I would bet that the majority of them or for minor issues.
As a kid I don't think there was ever more than 1 or 2 other people in my doctors waiting room when I visited, now if I go there is 10 or 12 usually.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
Quote:
Anyone hear about the Canadian ......think it was the prime minister - not sure on that - some top level guy in the gov't. of Canada - came to the U.S to have his heart surgery? Why would that be?
Because the doctor is the best in his field and the guy can afford to go anywhere in the world to have it done.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828 |
Quote:
Right mac.. the companies don't pay for it.. the people don't pay for it.. nobody freakin' pays for it.. it just materializes out of t¸in freakin' air and everybody in Mexico is afforded the greatest healthcare, that's why the Rio Grande is awash with people streaming over there to live, it's a damn utopia.
DC...pick any country you want..it doesn't matter if I say Mexico or China or Brazil since the United States is the only industrialized nation that does not have a universal health care system.
As for your attitude of to hell with those Americans who can't afford Blue Crosses 39% healthcare premium hike...like I said, we were raised with different values.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,138
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,138 |
I just caught a snippet of the hearings and everybody was in agreement that over a third of healthcare costs are not related to care of the patient. There was also some debate over the enormous costs of unwarranted diagnostics that physicians order to cover their butts against lawsuits. The last thing I caught were the billions in medicare/medicaid fraud being a major contributor to our escalating healthcare costs. All parties seemed to be in agreement. I'd like to see a trancript of the entire proceedings.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Quote:
Quote:
Anyone hear about the Canadian ......think it was the prime minister - not sure on that - some top level guy in the gov't. of Canada - came to the U.S to have his heart surgery? Why would that be?
Because the doctor is the best in his field and the guy can afford to go anywhere in the world to have it done.
We sign this Healthcare bill through and these kinds of instances and statements will no longer become true. We will no longer have the best doctors or procedures. And people will no longer be coming over to the US to have procedures done at any cost.....
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
As for your attitude of to hell with those Americans who can't afford Blue Crosses 39% healthcare premium hike...like I said, we were raised with different values.
Yes we were mac, we absolutely must have been raised with different values.. I was raised with values that said it is my obligation to help those that are less fortunate... you evidently were raised with the value that it is your obligation to make me help those that are less fortunate....
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828 |
Quote:
I was raised with values that said it is my obligation to help those that are less fortunate..
DC...nice words to try to describe your values but those values do not show up in your posts, IMO.
You sound like your saying to hell with everyone who is faced with trying to afford the out of sight premium hikes passed on to the American people by the big spenders to the GOP re-election campaigns...clearly putting corporate profits and campaign donations ahead of the needs of Americans who need but can't afford healtcare costs.
We have Americans dying because they can't afford to see a doctor...you realize that?...do you care about it?
This problem is real folks...and the longer we fail to address the problem...more Americans will die because they have no healthcare.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Harvard Medical Study Links Lack of Insurance to 45,000 U.S. Deaths a Year
As the White House and Congress continue debating how best to provide coverage to tens of millions of Americans currently without health insurance, a new study (PDF) is meant to offer a stark reminder of why lawmakers should continue to try. Researchers from Harvard Medical School say the lack of coverage can be tied to about 45,000 deaths a year in the United States — a toll that is greater than the number of people who die each year from kidney disease.
“If you extend coverage, you can save lives,” said Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, a professor of medicine at Harvard who is one of the study’s authors. The research is being published in the December issue of the American Journal of Public Health and was posted online Thursday.
The Harvard study found that people without health insurance had a 40 percent higher risk of death than those with private health insurance — as a result of being unable to obtain necessary medical care. The risk appears to have increased since 1993, when a similar study found the risk of death was 25 percent greater for the uninsured.
The increase in risk, according to the study, is likely to be a result of at least two factors. One is the greater difficulty the uninsured have today in finding care, as public hospitals have closed or cut back on services. The other is improvements in medical care for insured people with treatable chronic conditions like high blood pressure.
“As health care for the insured gets better, the gap between the insured and uninsured widens,” Dr. Woolhandler said.
web page
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
DC...nice words to try to describe your values but those values do not show up in your posts, IMO.
I don't really give a crap about your opinion mac... I'm not going to sit here and type out some resume of the time and the money that I've donated to charities and the underprivileged over the years mac... on one hand, I give of my time and money.. on the other hand, you give of your time and your money. The thing that separates us, the only thing, is that you seem to think you have a right to dictate how much of my time and my money I give, whereas I'm perfectly willing to leave your giving up to your own conscience.. that's the differece, deal with it.
Quote:
You sound like your saying to hell with everyone who is faced with trying to afford the out of sight premium hikes passed on to the American people by the big spenders to the GOP re-election campaigns...
I can't wait for you to read and comment on my post in the other thread about the big spenders and the lobbyists...
But what I'm saying is that this bill will not do what it says it will do without a ton of unintended consequences and that ultimately it will cost us 3 times what they say its going to cost and someday, maybe not this year or next but someday down the road, this thing is going to be a giant lead weight around the neck of our economy, not unlike darn near every other mega social program that we have enacted which has grown and grown and grown and we have absorbed it.. at some point, we won't be able to absorb any more.. and I fear this might be the one.
Quote:
This problem is real folks...and the longer we fail to address the problem...more Americans will die because they have no healthcare.
And someday, it is my fear, that this post will read.. more Americans will die because they have lousy healthcare.. (and that's not health insurance, that's just generally lousy healthcare available to them and all of us)... (well, all of us except Congress, because they aren't putting themselves into this wonderful healthcare plan they are selling the rest of us)
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
j/c. Just want to make an observation in general:
It's funny how those who are against government involvement in corporations have no problem with corporations running our government. GENERALLY SPEAKING.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
A lot of us are against both.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,180
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,180 |
The two must exist, but the Government should not be involved IN the business, it should be limited strictly to creating the environment in which the business operates.
Business, on the other hand, should be limited to running its business and it should NOT be lobbying for policy changes, special tax breaks, etc...
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Business, on the other hand, should be limited to running its business and it should NOT be lobbying for policy changes, special tax breaks, etc...
I disagree wholeheartedly. If I think we need a stop light on my corner, I should have the right to lobby my town to get one... if a business thinks it needs something from the federal government (like changes to trade laws, tax incentives, safety regulations, etc) to operate more effectively it should be able to lobby to get it... the problem comes when politicians are so tightly wound up in those corporations that they will defend them and vote for them, even when what they are asking for is illogical and does more harm than good... It's like if your kids come and ask you for cake every day and you give it to them, whose fault is it when they are obese, theirs or yours?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Mac, where do you think this money is going to come from to fund healthcare. Not to mention the government has never done anything inexpensively.
Technically, everyone already has health care, that's why my premiums are so high, because I subsidize those that don't pay.
All universal health care will do, is allow more and more people to make unneeded visits to doctors for stubbed toes, sneezing, watery eyes. driving up the costs of health care even more.
Once again, what we need to to scale back coverage to insurance, not just make it a free for all.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 293
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 293 |
Quote:
Quote:
The same reason that they demonize the "Rich". They're an easy target.
They have, and everybody wants. Make them the bad guy and we can start making a case that they don't need all that they have, we can take some of it.
It also creates a villain, a focus for the ire of the people.
Correct.
And unfortunately, too many ignorant people look and see "oh, company A made a billion dollars - those bad people", and they forget that company A employs 6,000, or 14,000 people.
They forget that if a company isn't making a profit, the company gets rid of jobs.
They don't see that company A has put billions more on the line in order to make their profit.
Like you said - they see an easy target, all the while being ignorant as to what that company contributes in taxes and jobs.
Insurance companies made billion$$$$$$ and they still want more. When do we say no more and draw the line? When were all broke and homeless. insurance can't keep going up, Can it?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,601
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,601 |
Quote:
The same reason that they demonize the "Rich". They're an easy target.
They have, and everybody wants. Make them the bad guy and we can start making a case that they don't need all that they have, we can take some of it.
It also creates a villain, a focus for the ire of the people.
I agree.
Companies and people who have something are the modern version of the Jew in 1930's Europe.
You have to have someone to blame
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Quote:
Insurance companies made billion$$$$$$ and they still want more. When do we say no more and draw the line? When were all broke and homeless. insurance can't keep going up, Can it?
GE made billions - Oil companies made billions. Where do YOU draw the line?
Also - just for the record, Anthem of Cal. lost money last year - that's why the increase in rates. Wellpoint made ......was it $4 billion? Wellpoint - the mother company of some 20 other companies? (I know my numbers are not exact, but they are close).
Did you make a profit last year? Meaning, did you earn more than you spent? If so, perhaps we should tax you more.
Did your company make a profit? Tax the hell out of them.
Right?
If we take the profit away - what company - in ANY business - is going to stay in business?
And before you say it - if we get national health care - the expenses will stay the same maybe - more than likely increase quite a bit - and the gov't. gets stuck with the bill. Know what the gov't. does with bills? They either raise taxes, or just print more money - and both will suck the life out of this country quicker than it's leaving right now.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Why does the mainstream media
"Demonize" American Companies?
|
|
