Sage2, "The Govt." already HAS direct acess to your bank account and has for years. Ask anyone that has had accounts seized by the IRS. You didn't know this?
On Aug 6, 1:15 am, Sage2 <[email protected]> wrote: > Holly , > > When you get to page 58, see how the government > will have direct access to your bank account. My insurance company > does not have access to my account! > > ************************************************************************************************************* > > On Aug 6, 12:23 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Richard, > > > Frankly, I'll have to pull up HR 3200 and examine it closer before i > > can make an objective and informed comment on it's contents. To date > > I've only read what others CLAIM it contains. > > > On Aug 5, 11:14 pm, RichardForbes <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > I am trying to keep an open mind about this and look for the good > > > ideas imbedded in the proposals. I am not very excited about HR 3200, > > > but the one idea they have correct is the Health Insurance Exchange. > > > The problem is that they take it too far. There is no need to do > > > that. Feel free to challenge me on my ideas, as I can only improve > > > them with input from other people with open minds about the topic. I > > > am not opposed to good reform, but I really do not think that HR 3200 > > > is the answer. > > > > On Aug 5, 10:55 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Richard, > > > > > Very good idea. > > > > > On Aug 5, 10:53 pm, RichardForbes <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > We have attempted to make our pension benefits portable. The same > > > > > idea is important for healthcare, though the implementation is a bit > > > > > different. I think that the combination of a government clearing > > > > > house for small employers and individuals along with a federal > > > > > exemption similar to ERISA would provide a bsais for the capacity to > > > > > create a more portable system. Any person teminated could gain access > > > > > through the clearing house and any person changing employers would > > > > > have the same capacity. It would eliminate much of the need for > > > > > insurers to have pre-existing condition clauses because the size of > > > > > the group would be large enough to limit the risk of adverse > > > > > selection. > > > > > > On Aug 5, 10:46 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Richard, > > > > > > > That you have. Nor was my question to you loaded. I do not believe > > > > > > we > > > > > > have to copy the system of any one nation, not France or germany or > > > > > > the Swiss, etc. I feel we should, and should have been doing this > > > > > > for > > > > > > years, carefully examine the systems or several of the nations that > > > > > > seem to have the most effective systems and "borrow" the best ideas > > > > > > from each of them and adopt them to our own country. There is, I > > > > > > believe, no one "magic bullet". One thing, and one thing only, that > > > > > > would help a great deal is to not link health insurance to one's > > > > > > employer. A working man/woman should be able to retain the same > > > > > > insurance he/she has AT THE SAME PRICE from employer to employer > > > > > > without interuption of coverage or benefits. Let a county, state, > > > > > > whatever take competitive bids from competing insurance companies to > > > > > > insure perhaps either all it's citizens or perhaps just those not > > > > > > already covered by Medicare. Let the premium be paid out some sort > > > > > > of > > > > > > interest bearing fund owned by that entity and have safeguards in > > > > > > place that prevent that fund for being used for ANYTHING else. Fund > > > > > > it > > > > > > by taxes levied on all the citizens of that entity. Sure there will > > > > > > be > > > > > > administrative expenses. Thik we're NOT paying for the > > > > > > administrative > > > > > > expensives of the insurance companies? Well managed (hopefully) the > > > > > > interest accumulated by such a large fund should off-set a goodly > > > > > > portion of those administrative costs. > > > > > > that is ONE idea only, and pretty much just off the top of my head. > > > > > > > And FORCE Medicare and Medicaid to go out on competive bids for all > > > > > > the drugs and other supplies. You want to be on the list of approved > > > > > > suppliers of "XYZ" medications? You better have the best price. if > > > > > > Walgreens or CVS does not want to buy from that company? Well to > > > > > > bad, > > > > > > guess some other drug store will get all the medicare business. > > > > > > Hell, > > > > > > how many people would start a drug store just to have all the > > > > > > medicare/ > > > > > > medicaid reciepents in a city, county or state? > > > > > > > And I like many of the ideas that you propose. Your thinking, and > > > > > > that's more than i can say for most people here and in our > > > > > > government. > > > > > > > On Aug 5, 9:49 pm, RichardForbes <[email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hollywood - > > > > > > > > I would hope that I have earned enough of your trust to merit an > > > > > > > honest reply to my question. I do not believe it was loaded and > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > reflected what I think is a significant issue. I would like your > > > > > > > reply. > > > > > > > > As to the question you asked, (I hope this is an adequate answer), > > > > > > > from my perspective it is pretty simple. We need to do the > > > > > > > following: > > > > > > > > First, you let the government create a clearing house for small > > > > > > > group > > > > > > > and individual purchases. That would give those the capacity to > > > > > > > obtain insurance at group rates and would require little time to > > > > > > > implement or a significant bureaucracy for oversight. In fact, > > > > > > > much > > > > > > > of the cost could be directly passed to the insurers. > > > > > > > > Second, you allow the federal government to exempt insurers from > > > > > > > state > > > > > > > laws and thus make > > > > > > > them free to sell across state lines. That would increase > > > > > > > competition > > > > > > > and reduce prices. > > > > > > > > Third, you utilize tax incentive to encourage employers to > > > > > > > provide a > > > > > > > minimal level of coverage while disincentivizing them from > > > > > > > providing > > > > > > > the "Cadillac policies". > > > > > > > > Last of all, you focus on assuring that all Americans have > > > > > > > catastrophic coverage and flexible spending accounts so that they > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > self-insure against minor health needs and still be protected > > > > > > > against > > > > > > > the biggest risks and thus make them healthcare consumers. > > > > > > > > It would take about FOUR pages to draft my bill and most would > > > > > > > understand it and it would > > > > > > > actually reduce the cost of healthcare. Obviously, I am opposed > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > ALL government bureaucracy without a very good reason. But, I > > > > > > > recognize they can help in some ways. I just think it is best to > > > > > > > limit their involvement to those rare areas where they can add > > > > > > > value. > > > > > > > > Please let me know what you think of the ideas. > > > > > > > > On Aug 5, 9:31 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Richard, > > > > > > > > > I'll counter that with a question of my own. Do you really > > > > > > > > think that > > > > > > > > American's are the ONLY modern, industrialized nation in the > > > > > > > > world too > > > > > > > > corrupt and/or stupid to be able to figure out a system to > > > > > > > > supply > > > > > > > > universal health care for their citizens? > > > > > > > > > On Aug 5, 9:18 pm, RichardForbes <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hollywood - > > > > > > > > > > I did not read through the entire thread and I have no idea > > > > > > > > > what you > > > > > > > > > may have said in prior posts. With that said, I have a > > > > > > > > > question for > > > > > > > > > you. Do you think that the federal government will more > > > > > > > > > efficiently > > > > > > > > > administer the healthcare in our country? > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 5, 9:05 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > frankg, > > > > > > > > > > > If the car dealers lay off people, if the car manufacturers > > > > > > > > > > lay off > > > > > > > > > > people, if the banks that make car loans lay off people,if > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > suppliers of those car dealers and manufacturers and banks > > > > > > > > > > lay off > > > > > > > > > > people whose money do you think will be used to pay for > > > > > > > > > > unemployment > > > > > > > > > > checks, food stamps if they need it, etc? > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 5, 8:42 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark, > > > > > > > > > > > > No kidding. I'm willing to bet I can drive the sales up > > > > > > > > > > > on just about > > > > > > > > > > > anything by offering to help pay for it with someone > > > > > > > > > > > else's money. > > > > > > > > > > > What's the point? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 5, 8:49 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > auto sales are up over 25% in europe under an identical > > > > > > > > > > > > program....it is > > > > > > > > > > > > working > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 5:37 PM, VT VirtualTruth > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I got news for you, the fact that the program was > > > > > > > > > > > > > depletedr an identical > > > > > > > > > > > > > program....it is working. > > > > > > > > > > > > > so quickly shows there was a need and as a stimulus > > > > > > > > > > > > > the earnings numbers for the auto industry says > > > > > > > > > > > > > it worked. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 4, 1:17 pm, Sage2 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Doc, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You and VT should take the advice of Senato > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sales or Schumer ( > > > > > > > > > > > > > D-NY ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > who said of the cash for clunkers program " don't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fix what ain't broke > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " . Health Care ain't broken , it just needs a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > little adjustment, but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guys like Obama and his ilk want to crush it ! > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
