• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Politifacts.com's Lie of the year goes to the Dems

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Lie of the Year 2011: 'Republicans voted to end Medicare'
By Bill Adair, Angie Drobnic Holan
Published on Tuesday, December 20th, 2011 at 12:05 a.m

Republicans muscled a budget through the House of Representatives in April that they said would take an important step toward reducing the federal deficit. Introduced by U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the plan kept Medicare intact for people 55 or older, but dramatically changed the program for everyone else by privatizing it and providing government subsidies.

Democrats pounced. Just four days after the party-line vote, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released a Web ad that said seniors will have to pay $12,500 more for health care "because Republicans voted to end Medicare."

Rep. Steve Israel of New York, head of the DCCC, appeared on cable news shows and declared that Republicans voted to "terminate Medicare." A Web video from the Agenda Project, a liberal group, said the plan would leave the country "without Medicare" and showed a Ryan look-alike pushing an old woman in a wheelchair off a cliff. And just last month, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi sent a fundraising appeal that said: "House Republicans’ vote to end Medicare is a shameful act of betrayal."
After two years of being pounded by Republicans with often false charges about the 2010 health care law, the Democrats were turning the tables.

PolitiFact debunked the Medicare charge in nine separate fact-checks rated False or Pants on Fire, most often in attacks leveled against Republican House members.

Now, PolitiFact has chosen the Democrats’ claim as the 2011 Lie of the Year.

It’s the third year in a row that a health care claim has won the dubious honor. In 2009, the winner was the Republicans’ charge that the Democrats’ health care plan included "death panels." In 2010, it was that the plan was a "government takeover of health care."

A complicated and wonky subject with life-or-death consequences, health care is fertile ground for falsehoods. The Democratic attack about "ending Medicare" was a pervasive line in 2011 that preyed on seniors' worries about whether they could afford health care.

Even when explained accurately, the Republicans’ Medicare plan was not particularly popular with the public, nor with some independent health policy analysts. But the plan was distorted and attacked again and again.

"In terms of creating a national conversation about fiscal reform, the last thing we need is demagoguing attacks against people who have put forward serious policy proposals," said Jason Peuquet, a policy analyst with the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. "It’s very worrying."

A persistent falsehood

With a few small tweaks to their attack lines, Democrats could have been factually correct, said Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. "I actually think there is no need to cut out the qualifiers and exaggerate," he said.

At times, Democrats and liberal groups were careful to characterize the Republican plan more accurately. Another claim in the ad from the Agenda Project said the plan would "privatize" Medicare, which received a Mostly True rating from PolitiFact. President Barack Obama was also more precise with his words, saying the Medicare proposal "would voucherize the program and you potentially have senior citizens paying $6,000 more."

But more often, Democrats and liberals overreached:

• They ignored the fact that the Ryan plan would not affect people currently in Medicare -- or even the people 55 to 65 who would join the program in the next 10 years.

• They used harsh terms such as "end" and "kill" when the program would still exist, although in a privatized system.

• They used pictures and video of elderly people who clearly were too old to be affected by the Ryan plan. The DCCC video that aired four days after the vote featured an elderly man who had to take a job as a stripper to pay his medical bills.

"Both parties use entitlements as political weapons," Ryan said in an interview with PolitiFact. "Republicans do it to Democrats; Democrats do it to Republicans. So I knew that this would be a political weapon that the other side would use against us."

Liberal bloggers and columnists contend it's accurate to say Republicans voted to end Medicare. Left-leaning websites such as Talking Points Memo, Daily Kos, and The New Republic said PolitiFact's analysis was wrong, as did New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.

"According to (PolitiFact's) logic, if the FBI were replaced with a voucher program wherein citizens would receive subsidies for hiring private investigators to look into criminal activity, but the agency running the voucher program were still called the FBI, it would be unfair to say that the FBI had been ended," wrote Jed Lewison for Daily Kos. "I guess it's their right to make that argument, but it's transparently absurd."

In a blog post, the DCCC stood by its claim, saying the ad accurately stated Ryan's plan would "abolish" Medicare.

But PolitiFact was not alone. Other independent fact-checkers also said the claim was false.

"Medicare would remain an entitlement program, but it would also be more costly to future beneficiaries. It would not end," noted FactCheck.org, a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. The Washington Post’s Fact Checker concluded that while there’s "a worthwhile debate" about whether Ryan’s proposal should be adopted, "it is not true to claim Republicans are trying to ‘kill’ Medicare."

The Democratic attacks struck a chord. Polls showed voters were skeptical of the Ryan plan and want Medicare to remain largely the way it is now. That may be why the plan has virtually no prospects of passing the Senate, which voted to shelve the plan. President Obama has indicated he would veto any changes to Medicare that would privatize the program and substantially shift costs to beneficiaries.

How the Ryan plan would work

Under the current Medicare system, the government pays the health care bills for Americans over age 65. Under the Ryan plan, future beneficiaries would be given a credit and invited to shop for an approved plan on a Medicare health insurance exchange. It received overwhelming support from Republicans in a House vote on a budget blueprint.

Starting in 2022, beneficiaries would receive "premium support payments" from the government to help pay for the private insurance. People who need more health care would get a little more money, and high earners would get a little less.

The plan has some guarantees for coverage, although seniors would have to pay more to get the benefits they receive today, according to an analysis completed earlier this year by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

The guarantees: Ryan's plan requires private insurers to accept all applicants and to charge the same rate for people who are the same age. The plans would comply with standards set by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, which administers the health plans of federal employees. The Medicare eligibility age would rise from 65 to 67, an idea that has received some bipartisan support in the past.

The CBO found that it would save the government money. But it does so by asking future Medicare beneficiaries to pay more for the same benefits.

Ryan says the plan would offer more choice for Medicare participants and increase competition among private insurers to drive down cost.

"I’m a big believer in patient-centered choice, where the beneficiary is the prime decision-maker, which drives competition and innovation, and that’s missing from the status quo, to a large degree," he said.

It’s not the first time it’s been suggested that Medicare be changed from its current fee-for-service, where the government pays all the bills, to one that uses private insurers. In the past, some Democrats have even favored such proposals, especially if -- unlike the Ryan plan -- the support was linked to medical inflation, or there were an option for traditional Medicare, or there were more explicit protections for consumers.

Just last week, Ryan agreed to a new framework with Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. Their proposal uses Ryan’s idea for private insurers and exchanges, but it leaves traditional Medicare as an option.

Private insurers already offer Medicare plans under the program Medicare Advantage, though those plans have proven more expensive than traditional Medicare, not less.

The partisan split on health care reveals the contradictions of congressional debate. Republicans were staunchly against the insurance exchanges in the federal health care law. But they endorsed them in the Ryan proposal, even as Democrats switched to oppose the plan.

"Ryan basically proposed the Affordable Care Act for future seniors," said Jonathan Gruber, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who advised both President Obama and Republican Mitt Romney on health care. "I don't understand how you can like it for future seniors but not like it for today's needy uninsured. That doesn't make any sense."

'Scaring 85-year-olds'

Kathleen Hall Jamieson, an expert on campaign advertising who directs the Annenberg center at the University of Pennsylvania, says Democrats have been using falsehoods and exaggerations about Medicare and Social Security since at least 1952. She calls it the longest-running "Democratic deception."

It fits with a core theme from Democrats that they will use government to protect seniors and needy people, while Republicans supposedly want to cut those programs, she says. It is a scare tactic that works.


"If you're reliant on Medicare, a suggestion your benefits are going to be cut in any way is a direct, visceral threat," said Jamieson.

Republicans actually used a version of the attack in 2010, claiming Democrats cut $500 billion from Medicare to pay for Obama's health care law; the law actually sought to reduce the growth of future spending with a series of efficiency measures. But historically, attacks about Medicare have come from Democrats.

In the 1950s and 1960s, Democrats used images of Social Security cards being torn in half to suggest that Republicans wanted to cut the program. In 1995, Democrats said House Speaker Newt Gingrich's plan to restructure Medicare would force seniors to pay more and would "wreck" Medicare.

President Bill Clinton vetoed the Republicans' Medicare bill, and used the issue to pummel GOP nominee Bob Dole in the 1996 campaign.

Gingrich complained at the time that "Medicare is the one issue the left believes they can lie about and demagogue." He described the Democrats as "totally morally bankrupt" and said, "They are reduced to scaring 85-year-olds."

The scare tactics are effective because seniors worry about being able to pay their medical bills and Medicare is a vital program for them. Also, seniors represent a large, up-for-grabs voting bloc.

Jonathan Oberlander, a health policy professor at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, said, "If you can scare seniors that something is going to happen to those programs, there is potentially a huge payoff in votes."

The Dems won the Lie of the year with their lies about the Republicans voting to abolish Medicare AND You can bet if Ron Paul gets the nomination the Dems will destroy the Republicans over his beliefs that SS and Medicare are unconstitutional and should be abolished.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Deadlocked Congress warned Medicare claims can't be delayed for long

By Julian Pecquet - 12/21/11 10:49 AM ET

Almost 650,000 doctors will see a steep cut to their Medicare payments on Jan. 18 if Congress doesn't act before then, the Medicare agency warned.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in the past has been able to delay payments for more than 20 days as lawmakers hashed out legislation to prevent scheduled cuts. But doing so almost crashed agency computer systems that are designed to expedite payments, The Associated Press reports.

"We feel that [Medicare] came very close operationally to crashing our system back in 2010," Medicare deputy administrator Jonathan Blum told the wire service. "From a stewardship perspective, that is something we feel we can never repeat again."


As a result, the agency told doctors on Monday that it would hold their claims for 10 business days while waiting for Congress to avert the looming payment cut, scheduled to take effect Jan. 1.

The Senate approved a temporary "doc fix" that delays the cuts for two months as part of a larger payroll tax cut package. House Republican leaders rejected the Senate's package on Tuesday and are still clamoring for longer-term action on the payroll tax cut and the doc fix.

Great ammo for the Dems...The folks at the elder care assisted living center yesterday were already talking that they hoped their doctors weren't the ones dropping medicare- and how could the Republicans play politics with all this....

People expect more than just saying NO- they want alternatives...

Boner and his boys are going to let Obama have a free ride back to a second term....
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
8,019
Reaction score
0
Location
Az.
yep real unbiased reporting again from oldtimer

Julian Pecquet
Health Policy Reporter, The Hill
Washington D.C. Metro Area Media Production
Past
Associate Editor at Inside Washington Publishers
Reporter at Tallahassee Democrat
Education
University of Missouri-Columbia
Connections
63 connections
Websites
Healthwatch

:) but then we know he only pastes things that make him feel good about himself,, and the Good Lord knows he needs all the help he can get in that matter :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Oldtimer STOP the derogitory name calling it only show just how sick you are. :x


The worst fears about Obamacare are now being realized in a decision on Monday by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MPAC) established by the law to supervise $500 billion in Medicare cuts. MPAC, whose decisions have the force of law, has voted to impose drastic pay cuts on all doctors under Medicare and, by extension, under Medicaid (which tends to follow suit). The cuts will effectively reduce the real pay for specialists by 50% over the next ten years --- including a 25% reduction over the next three years -- and cut general practitioners' pay by one-third over ten years (and that assumes that inflation stays down at 3% a year).

MPAC has ruled that specialists must accept a 6% cut in their fees per year for each of the next three years followed by a seven year freeze in their fees without any adjustment for inflation. If inflation stays very low -- at 3% per year -- this cut amounts to an 18% cut in nominal pay and a 50% cut in real pay for specialists. General practitioners will face a ten year freeze on their pay, reducing their real compensation by one-third assuming ongoing low inflation. Higher inflation, of course, would make the cuts in real pay even more drastic.


The consequences of the MPAC decision will be immediate and drastic:* Many physicians, and many more specialists, will refuse to treat Medicare patients. It will become very, very difficult to see a cardiologist or an oncologist or a gastroenterologist or OB-GYN specialist if you are on Medicare unless you are willing to pay out of pocket or have the kind of health insurance coverage from a private source that would reimburse for their care.


* More and more medical care will be turned over to nurses or physician assistants, and fewer people will ever get to see a doctor on Medicare.


* Private health insurers will follow in the footsteps of the Medicare program and likely slash their fees as well.


* Fewer students will enter medicine, and a major shortage of doctors will reduce the quality of medical care in America drastically.

The MPAC cuts will bring American doctors' incomes more into line with European doctors who typically earn half or less of what their American counterparts earn -- and deliver worse medical care as a result.


We have got to stop these MPAC cuts from taking effect. The very future of Medicare and of our entire health care system is at stake. If they are allowed to stand, Medicare will become akin to Medicaid or public housing -- a program for poor people who cannot afford to pay for medical care from specialists outside the system.

Who Oldtimer is responsible for the cuts the elderly fear? Answer YOUR HERO.

And where are Senate Dems? answer NOT IS WASHINGTON.

They left town before the bill was on Obama's desk. They had to have known that Boehner was not going to pass their version and should have stayed to see the process through but Reid left town so he could blame the whole mess on the Republicans. The Dems made the cuts when they shoved Obamacare down the throats of everyone and wouldn't even stick around town long enough to see to it they don't take effect. AND THE REPUBLICANS ARE TO TAKE THE BLAME :roll: Answer this if you had an employee and he went home for Christmas before his job was done would you be happy or would you FIRE HIM. Reid left town before the job was done and he deserves to be fired for his actions.
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
As much research as our resident obama butt ornament does you think he would have run across his proof of his socalled sexual harassment.

Heck he hasn't even shown us the website where he claims other people were talking about the conservatives on Ranchers.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I think you are flat wrong... Obama is coming out smelling like a rose- and Boner and the TeaParty crew are coming out like Ogres to the working class, seniors, professionals and most Republicans that look past their nose and rose colored glasses..

Here is an issue supported by the Administration- Dems and Repubs in the Senate (90%)- Dems in the House-- and who's House leader supported it and told even his own Party members they would pass it--then flipflopped-and now only being held up by a minority group in the House...

The Senate went home because Senators (both Repub and Dem) had been promised by Boner that the House would pass the Senate extension...Then after Boner found out he doesn't even know his own people he flipflopped and tried to call even the Repub Senators liars...

Even most sensible Republicans can see that Boner is done as any kind of trusted leader- and that his following of the TeaPartyiers is helping the Dems...

News from The Hill:

McConnell urges House to pass Senate's payroll tax bill By Alexander Bolton

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell on Thursday urged House Republicans to pass a two-month extension of the payroll tax cut, putting greater pressure on House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) to act.
McConnell said House passage of a Senate-approved payroll tax relief package “locks in” legislative language requiring President Obama to speed up his timetable for approving the Keystone XL oil sands pipeline.

The bipartisan Senate package also includes a two-month extension of unemployment benefits and a two-month freeze of scheduled cuts to doctors’ Medicare payments. It is offset by increasing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac fees, cutting about $3 billion from the deficit.


Obama to House GOP: 'Enough is enough'

By Amie Parnes - 12/22/11 01:34 PM ET

Saying "enough is enough" and calling Washington "dysfunctional," President Obama on Thursday urged Republicans in the House to pass a bipartisan Senate compromise that would extend the payroll tax holiday for two months.

"What's happening right now is exactly why people get so frustrated with Washington," Obama said standing before a room of Democratic stakeholders. "Has this place become so dysfunctional that even when people agree to things we can't do it?"

Obama said he is at the ready, waiting to sign the bill so 160 million Americans don't see their taxes go up at the end of the year.

"Why not make it sooner rather than later?" he asked.

He blamed a faction of House Republicans for holding up the bill.

"This is about people," he said. "This is about the American people and whether they win. It's not about a contest between politicians."

Obama said nearly 30,000 people have written in so far to complain about the hold up and said those people "should remind every single member of congress what's at stake in this debate."


While the economy has improved, the president said, "there's still a lot of uncertainty out there" not just in the U.S. But around the world.

The tax extension, he continued,"is insurance to make sure that our recovery continues."


Obama has refused to budge in the tax fight since the Senate passed the bipartisan Senate compromise on Saturday, but so has the Republican majority in the House.

In phone conversations with House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Wednesday and Thursday, Obama told the Speaker that the only viable option on the table is for the House to pass the Senate compromise, which received support of 89 senators.

According to a White House readout of the conversation, Obama told Boehner he is “committed” to working on a one year deal once the House passes the Senate compromise.

Boehner and other GOP leaders gave no indication that the House would accede to demands from across the government that they accept a bipartisan Senate compromise and go home for the holidays. The House GOP wants to pass a one-year extension of the payroll tax cut without a temporary extension.

“It’s time for us to sit down and have a serious negotiation and solve this problem so that American workers don’t see their taxes go up in January,” Boehner said at a Thursday news conference convened with the eight Republicans he appointed as negotiators.

Thursday morning, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) urged House Republicans to pass the Senate's two-month extension.

Earlier in the week, in a surprise appearance in the White House briefing room, he urged House Republicans to “put politics aside” and support the two-month extension, saying it was the only way to prevent a tax hike.

“This is not poker, this is not a game,” Obama said on Tuesday. “Let’s not play brinksmanship. The American people are weary of it. They’re tired of it. They expect better.”


Boehner and other GOP leaders gave no indication that the House would accede to demands from across the government that they accept a bipartisan Senate compromise and go home for the holidays. The House GOP wants to pass a one-year extension of the payroll tax cut without a temporary extension.

“It’s time for us to sit down and have a serious negotiation and solve this problem so that American workers don’t see their taxes go up in January,” Boehner said at a Thursday news conference convened with the eight Republicans he appointed as negotiators.

Boehner insults the intelligence of the American public with comments like that... Everyone knows that they have had months and months to sit down and have serious negotiation- and solve the problem- but they did not do it, instead now wanting to make it into a dog and pony show-- and rush thru a hastily put together compromise bill..

Something I thought everyone on this site previously had opposed- the riders and additions stuck on quickly put together bills :???:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Obamacare steals from medicare, and gives to illegals, and the payroll tax cuts steal from SS.

obama and the Democrats are hurting the "middle class" and OT supports him all the way........
 

TSR

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
2,115
Reaction score
0
Tam said:
Oldtimer STOP the derogitory name calling it only show just how sick you are. :x


The worst fears about Obamacare are now being realized in a decision on Monday by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MPAC) established by the law to supervise $500 billion in Medicare cuts. MPAC, whose decisions have the force of law, has voted to impose drastic pay cuts on all doctors under Medicare and, by extension, under Medicaid (which tends to follow suit). The cuts will effectively reduce the real pay for specialists by 50% over the next ten years --- including a 25% reduction over the next three years -- and cut general practitioners' pay by one-third over ten years (and that assumes that inflation stays down at 3% a year).

MPAC has ruled that specialists must accept a 6% cut in their fees per year for each of the next three years followed by a seven year freeze in their fees without any adjustment for inflation. If inflation stays very low -- at 3% per year -- this cut amounts to an 18% cut in nominal pay and a 50% cut in real pay for specialists. General practitioners will face a ten year freeze on their pay, reducing their real compensation by one-third assuming ongoing low inflation. Higher inflation, of course, would make the cuts in real pay even more drastic.


The consequences of the MPAC decision will be immediate and drastic:* Many physicians, and many more specialists, will refuse to treat Medicare patients. It will become very, very difficult to see a cardiologist or an oncologist or a gastroenterologist or OB-GYN specialist if you are on Medicare unless you are willing to pay out of pocket or have the kind of health insurance coverage from a private source that would reimburse for their care.


* More and more medical care will be turned over to nurses or physician assistants, and fewer people will ever get to see a doctor on Medicare.


* Private health insurers will follow in the footsteps of the Medicare program and likely slash their fees as well.


* Fewer students will enter medicine, and a major shortage of doctors will reduce the quality of medical care in America drastically.

The MPAC cuts will bring American doctors' incomes more into line with European doctors who typically earn half or less of what their American counterparts earn -- and deliver worse medical care as a result.


We have got to stop these MPAC cuts from taking effect. The very future of Medicare and of our entire health care system is at stake. If they are allowed to stand, Medicare will become akin to Medicaid or public housing -- a program for poor people who cannot afford to pay for medical care from specialists outside the system.

Who Oldtimer is responsible for the cuts the elderly fear? Answer YOUR HERO.

And where are Senate Dems? answer NOT IS WASHINGTON.

They left town before the bill was on Obama's desk. They had to have known that Boehner was not going to pass their version and should have stayed to see the process through but Reid left town so he could blame the whole mess on the Republicans. The Dems made the cuts when they shoved Obamacare down the throats of everyone and wouldn't even stick around town long enough to see to it they don't take effect. AND THE REPUBLICANS ARE TO TAKE THE BLAME :roll: Answer this if you had an employee and he went home for Christmas before his job was done would you be happy or would you FIRE HIM. Reid left town before the job was done and he deserves to be fired for his actions.

Well I'm all teared up for those doctors represented by the AMA lobbyists in DC. Why shouldn't they have to give up a little, middle class has haven't they, or has the middle class' pay gone up at the same rate the top 1% has which would include many doctors?? Recently on C-Span it was reported that American surgeons make 4-6 times what their European counterparts of industrialized nations receive. But you need not worry, Congress probably isn't going to do anything to hurt doctor's pay or big Pharma CEO's. I do feel for the family practitioners whose pay is pretty consistent with their European counterparts according to the report I heard.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
Recently on C-Span it was reported that American surgeons make 4-6 times what their European counterparts of industrialized nations receive.

surgeons often make more then the primary care doctors who are hurt the most by these cuts,... it is like attacking school administer pay packages and then cutting teacher's pay

teachersalary.jpg
http://www.worldsalaries.org/teacher.shtml



are you willing to take a forced pay cut as well to lower your pay standards?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
TSR said:
Tam said:
Oldtimer STOP the derogitory name calling it only show just how sick you are. :x


The worst fears about Obamacare are now being realized in a decision on Monday by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MPAC) established by the law to supervise $500 billion in Medicare cuts. MPAC, whose decisions have the force of law, has voted to impose drastic pay cuts on all doctors under Medicare and, by extension, under Medicaid (which tends to follow suit). The cuts will effectively reduce the real pay for specialists by 50% over the next ten years --- including a 25% reduction over the next three years -- and cut general practitioners' pay by one-third over ten years (and that assumes that inflation stays down at 3% a year).

MPAC has ruled that specialists must accept a 6% cut in their fees per year for each of the next three years followed by a seven year freeze in their fees without any adjustment for inflation. If inflation stays very low -- at 3% per year -- this cut amounts to an 18% cut in nominal pay and a 50% cut in real pay for specialists. General practitioners will face a ten year freeze on their pay, reducing their real compensation by one-third assuming ongoing low inflation. Higher inflation, of course, would make the cuts in real pay even more drastic.


The consequences of the MPAC decision will be immediate and drastic:* Many physicians, and many more specialists, will refuse to treat Medicare patients. It will become very, very difficult to see a cardiologist or an oncologist or a gastroenterologist or OB-GYN specialist if you are on Medicare unless you are willing to pay out of pocket or have the kind of health insurance coverage from a private source that would reimburse for their care.


* More and more medical care will be turned over to nurses or physician assistants, and fewer people will ever get to see a doctor on Medicare.


* Private health insurers will follow in the footsteps of the Medicare program and likely slash their fees as well.


* Fewer students will enter medicine, and a major shortage of doctors will reduce the quality of medical care in America drastically.

The MPAC cuts will bring American doctors' incomes more into line with European doctors who typically earn half or less of what their American counterparts earn -- and deliver worse medical care as a result.


We have got to stop these MPAC cuts from taking effect. The very future of Medicare and of our entire health care system is at stake. If they are allowed to stand, Medicare will become akin to Medicaid or public housing -- a program for poor people who cannot afford to pay for medical care from specialists outside the system.

Who Oldtimer is responsible for the cuts the elderly fear? Answer YOUR HERO.

And where are Senate Dems? answer NOT IS WASHINGTON.

They left town before the bill was on Obama's desk. They had to have known that Boehner was not going to pass their version and should have stayed to see the process through but Reid left town so he could blame the whole mess on the Republicans. The Dems made the cuts when they shoved Obamacare down the throats of everyone and wouldn't even stick around town long enough to see to it they don't take effect. AND THE REPUBLICANS ARE TO TAKE THE BLAME :roll: Answer this if you had an employee and he went home for Christmas before his job was done would you be happy or would you FIRE HIM. Reid left town before the job was done and he deserves to be fired for his actions.

Well I'm all teared up for those doctors represented by the AMA lobbyists in DC. Why shouldn't they have to give up a little, middle class has haven't they, or has the middle class' pay gone up at the same rate the top 1% has which would include many doctors?? Recently on C-Span it was reported that American surgeons make 4-6 times what their European counterparts of industrialized nations receive. But you need not worry, Congress probably isn't going to do anything to hurt doctor's pay or big Pharma CEO's. I do feel for the family practitioners whose pay is pretty consistent with their European counterparts according to the report I heard.



2 things, most doctors provide a service that the majority of the middle class are not capable, or able, to provide......and 2nd, is the service that European citizens obtain the same as what American citizens do?

You cannot make comparisons such as this, based solely on personal income, and you know this.....apples to oranges.....
 

Latest posts

Top