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

Town Hall?

Hay Feeder

Well-known member
From what I have seen not to many people are listening to one another at these town hall meetings. Some senators come in with the idea they are going to tell the people there way or the highway. And people come into the meetings to support or reject the idea.
If any goverment offical would come to this town we would have thr town loaded with people wanting to take jabs at the government no matter what the subject is.
Watching Fox and Cnn is the difference between night and day both stations can not report in the middle of these health care issues. Our US Senator came to the area where they carried heavy and still got plenty of jabs but the senator starting yelling back at the people. And when people get hot no one listens or in that matter thinks very well.

Today a Dr made some commnets about how he works with insurance, medicare etc in his clinic. He say he has problems with all.
However the just of what he said was he tought to many people would be taking unfar advantage of a US health care system and they would not be enough Dr to go around. His comments we basically ingnored

What a time to interject with a idea like we can educate more american born dr in our country..or hey mabe we can put a cap on repeated vists from the same person, or maybe private insurance companies might out do the US health care plan and give the government some competition..
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Obama's intent is clearly one sided to begin with. He's not going to these meetings to listen to the people, he's going to preach. His whole intent is to push his will thru.

Senators and congressmen and women have listened to the people. That is why we have the blue chips/blue dogs.

Most all of us who choose to be informed have already heard anything Obama poses at these meetings. Nothing is new. So if you go and listen to him, you're going to hear rhetoric and emotion. Professional common folks go to speak to him and they are essentially not being heard to begin with.

You mentioned FOX and CNN. Look at the ratings. A while back FOX owned all of the top ten news programs. Who do you think advertisers want to air their commercials with? Why do you think FOX is number 1?

My peers and myself at work have stayed with our company because of benefits. We have turned down very lucrative paying jobs elsewhere. Mostly it is because we are earning pensions and will have insurance upon retirement. If we chose to be job shoppers we would make significantly more money, but lose out. With the Obama plan, it doesn't matter. We should have tripled our salaries years back.

We fall under the "less than $250K crowd" but we all know we are going to pay, one way or another.

Corporate piracy is already vicious. We have lost practically all engineers that are under 30 years old. They have simply left for jobs above that threshhold. Of the 17 engineers we hired in 1993, one remains employed with the company. 16 have moved on. Most everyone working with me now has 30 plus years experience. That is a lot of knowledge to walk out the door if Obama wins. I suspect most all will take an early retirement for their pensions, and go triple their salaries at other sites.

Obama has not thoroughly looked at the ramifications of everything he has already done let alone what he intends or wants to do. It is just like he said in his election campaign over and over, "we're looking in to it but...." He doesn't know, doesn't have a clue, and has not yet understood what he speaks of.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
backhoeboogie said:
Obama's intent is clearly one sided to begin with. He's not going to these meetings to listen to the people, he's going to preach. His whole intent is to push his will thru.

Senators and congressmen and women have listened to the people. That is why we have the blue chips/blue dogs.

Most all of us who choose to be informed have already heard anything Obama poses at these meetings. Nothing is new. So if you go and listen to him, you're going to hear rhetoric and emotion. Professional common folks go to speak to him and they are essentially not being heard to begin with.

You mentioned FOX and CNN. Look at the ratings. A while back FOX owned all of the top ten news programs. Who do you think advertisers want to air their commercials with? Why do you think FOX is number 1?

My peers and myself at work have stayed with our company because of benefits. We have turned down very lucrative paying jobs elsewhere. Mostly it is because we are earning pensions and will have insurance upon retirement. If we chose to be job shoppers we would make significantly more money, but lose out. With the Obama plan, it doesn't matter. We should have tripled our salaries years back.

We fall under the "less than $250K crowd" but we all know we are going to pay, one way or another.

Corporate piracy is already vicious. We have lost practically all engineers that are under 30 years old. They have simply left for jobs above that threshhold. Of the 17 engineers we hired in 1993, one remains employed with the company. 16 have moved on. Most everyone working with me now has 30 plus years experience. That is a lot of knowledge to walk out the door if Obama wins. I suspect most all will take an early retirement for their pensions, and go triple their salaries at other sites.

Obama has not thoroughly looked at the ramifications of everything he has already done let alone what he intends or wants to do. It is just like he said in his election campaign over and over, "we're looking in to it but...." He doesn't know, doesn't have a clue, and has not yet understood what he speaks of.

Good point! We do not have the benefits that you do! But me and wife screwed up when young and did not have insurance, we corrected that and wife went back to college to get a profession within the Medical field for two reasons one because we thought we could find a job with good benefits and two because there was a need for her profession.

Obama now wants to mess with what we worked for and are plenty happy with. My wife could have made more money working for me, now that we planned Obama and others don't Obama wants me to pay for them. Crap we already paid for ourselves by missed money to go to college, by paying for college out of pocket, but now we will lose what we worked for and be forced to pay for someone else because they do not take personal responsibility like we did! :mad:
 

Hay Feeder

Well-known member
I hate to answer my own post..And I do not disagree with other posts either.
I have been retired for a year now with a pension which I payed into for 28 years. My employer had always paid for our health insurance however that was taken out of our pay checks. In those year they told us they could not give us a raise because they had to use the pay raise to pay for our health insurance. They also told us they have to pay for all the retired employees insurance also. When I retired and after my replacement was hired. They told me they would only pay half of my insurance and I would owe them $300 per month for my half. This insurance is only accepted at certain places.

I am sure several Ranchers have to pay out of there pocket for their own insurance as well as self employed people. I would not be surprised it would be higher than mine. I did not budget in a extra $3600 per year for my personal insurance.

Several people in this area have government assistance, medicare and medicare anyway. Everyone is paying for that.
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
But you chose to stay with that employer for pension and insurance assistance.

I am paying part of my policy now and will be like you when I retire. But I will not have to pay for the entire policy independent and on my own.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Any "Public" option, or gov't assistance plan brought forth to date will not stop the escalation of health care costs.

The real argument is to somehow stop the incremental price increases for medical services in general.

Putting the insurance companies out of business is not the answer.
They are paying 135% of their share at present, while Medicare is only paying about 84%, with Medicaid paying less. The prices paid to Medicare and Medicaid both will not sustain the facilities, providers, and doctors now.

What happens when all gov't health payments are too low to sustain growth for providers & leave us with less options?

What we need is temporary freeze on medical cost escalation until this thing is worked out.

Furthermore, the protesting at the Town Meetings have been the best thing that could have ever happened to this country. We have let our politicians know to back off and think this thing through.

Of course the Left just sits by and criticizes............leaving it all up to our leaders to make a hasty choice, be it wrong or right. :roll:
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Mike my point is that decisions made 30 years ago will be affected by Obama's plan. Retired folks now worked for companies (some their whole life) based on benefits.

We made good choices back then but Obama is going to dump the basket.
 

Mike

Well-known member
backhoeboogie said:
Mike my point is that decisions made 30 years ago will be affected by Obama's plan. Retired folks now worked for companies (some their whole life) based on benefits.

We made good choices back then but Obama is going to dump the basket.

I see your point.........and it is a good one............. :wink:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hay Feeder said:
From what I have seen not to many people are listening to one another at these town hall meetings. Some senators come in with the idea they are going to tell the people there way or the highway. And people come into the meetings to support or reject the idea.
If any goverment offical would come to this town we would have thr town loaded with people wanting to take jabs at the government no matter what the subject is.
Watching Fox and Cnn is the difference between night and day both stations can not report in the middle of these health care issues. Our US Senator came to the area where they carried heavy and still got plenty of jabs but the senator starting yelling back at the people. And when people get hot no one listens or in that matter thinks very well.

Today a Dr made some commnets about how he works with insurance, medicare etc in his clinic. He say he has problems with all.
However the just of what he said was he tought to many people would be taking unfar advantage of a US health care system and they would not be enough Dr to go around. His comments we basically ingnored

What a time to interject with a idea like we can educate more american born dr in our country..or hey mabe we can put a cap on repeated vists from the same person, or maybe private insurance companies might out do the US health care plan and give the government some competition..
I think that the plan that people are critizing has benefits and incentives to train more doctors in to primary care, more nurse practioners, and physians assitants. Would someone read it and tell me if I am right or wrong.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
aplusmnt said:
backhoeboogie said:
Obama's intent is clearly one sided to begin with. He's not going to these meetings to listen to the people, he's going to preach. His whole intent is to push his will thru.

Senators and congressmen and women have listened to the people. That is why we have the blue chips/blue dogs.

Most all of us who choose to be informed have already heard anything Obama poses at these meetings. Nothing is new. So if you go and listen to him, you're going to hear rhetoric and emotion. Professional common folks go to speak to him and they are essentially not being heard to begin with.

You mentioned FOX and CNN. Look at the ratings. A while back FOX owned all of the top ten news programs. Who do you think advertisers want to air their commercials with? Why do you think FOX is number 1?

My peers and myself at work have stayed with our company because of benefits. We have turned down very lucrative paying jobs elsewhere. Mostly it is because we are earning pensions and will have insurance upon retirement. If we chose to be job shoppers we would make significantly more money, but lose out. With the Obama plan, it doesn't matter. We should have tripled our salaries years back.

We fall under the "less than $250K crowd" but we all know we are going to pay, one way or another.

Corporate piracy is already vicious. We have lost practically all engineers that are under 30 years old. They have simply left for jobs above that threshhold. Of the 17 engineers we hired in 1993, one remains employed with the company. 16 have moved on. Most everyone working with me now has 30 plus years experience. That is a lot of knowledge to walk out the door if Obama wins. I suspect most all will take an early retirement for their pensions, and go triple their salaries at other sites.

Obama has not thoroughly looked at the ramifications of everything he has already done let alone what he intends or wants to do. It is just like he said in his election campaign over and over, "we're looking in to it but...." He doesn't know, doesn't have a clue, and has not yet understood what he speaks of.

Good point! We do not have the benefits that you do! But me and wife screwed up when young and did not have insurance, we corrected that and wife went back to college to get a profession within the Medical field for two reasons one because we thought we could find a job with good benefits and two because there was a need for her profession.

Obama now wants to mess with what we worked for and are plenty happy with. My wife could have made more money working for me, now that we planned Obama and others don't Obama wants me to pay for them. Crap we already paid for ourselves by missed money to go to college, by paying for college out of pocket, but now we will lose what we worked for and be forced to pay for someone else because they do not take personal responsibility like we did! :mad:

Could be if a government plan was available that you could afford then your wife could have worked with you and not had to go out to work.
Also if it was not for the government run medicare plan and mediciad plan your wife might not be needed now in the healthcare industry. This is just food for thought and I am not trying to slam you.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
My question is: Why has Obama not tackled limiting the amounts
paid in Malpractice Suits?

I think it is because he would never limit his colleagues--LAWYERS.

To me, it is obvious because of it's omission.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hurleyjd said:
Hay Feeder said:
From what I have seen not to many people are listening to one another at these town hall meetings. Some senators come in with the idea they are going to tell the people there way or the highway. And people come into the meetings to support or reject the idea.
If any goverment offical would come to this town we would have thr town loaded with people wanting to take jabs at the government no matter what the subject is.
Watching Fox and Cnn is the difference between night and day both stations can not report in the middle of these health care issues. Our US Senator came to the area where they carried heavy and still got plenty of jabs but the senator starting yelling back at the people. And when people get hot no one listens or in that matter thinks very well.

Today a Dr made some commnets about how he works with insurance, medicare etc in his clinic. He say he has problems with all.
However the just of what he said was he tought to many people would be taking unfar advantage of a US health care system and they would not be enough Dr to go around. His comments we basically ingnored

What a time to interject with a idea like we can educate more american born dr in our country..or hey mabe we can put a cap on repeated vists from the same person, or maybe private insurance companies might out do the US health care plan and give the government some competition..
I think that the plan that people are critizing has benefits and incentives to train more doctors in to primary care, more nurse practioners, and physians assitants. Would someone read it and tell me if I am right or wrong.

You are correct- both bills contain a section on increasing the number of health care providers- which includes more aid to colleges/universities that provide medical provider training-- tuition subsidies/grants for medical and nursing type students- more use of Community Colleges- etc., etc...Also a heavier emphasis on more health care clinics- to get early detection/treatment to avoid the necessity of hospitalization...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Faster horses said:
My question is: Why has Obama not tackled limiting the amounts
paid in Malpractice Suits?

I think it is because he would never limit his colleagues--LAWYERS.

To me, it is obvious because of it's omission.

FH- while there is some in both bills on stopping malpractice suits- I don't think any go far enough in tort reform-- and none ever will.....

Remember over 200 folks in Congress list their occupations as Lawyer...
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Talk to your doctor about Obama's Health Care Reform.
Everyone of them that I have talked with, are hoping to retire
in 7 years. They don't like it.

I have a young friend that has waited all her life to become a doctor.
She's in medical school right now. Carries 21 subjects with a 4.0
average. She's intelligent and very dedicated. She has a problem getting scholarships becuase she is neither Black, Hispanic or Asian. They get
most of the scholarships. Not white girls.That has disappointed her because she fills out lots of applications. Right now, she is considering
BioChemestry because of what Obama is proposing. Why should she spend $350,000 and all those years getting a degree when she will only be able to make $70,000/yr?

So what good is Health Care Reform if we have no doctors?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You are correct OT. Funny, I can remember the first time I realized that so many in elected offices were attorneys. I was getting some propane from the propane place in Buffalo, Wyoming. The owner was a wise
ole' fella and self-made. We were taling politics and he said, "If anyone runs for office that is not an attorney, I'll vote for 'em."
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
backhoeboogie said:
Mike my point is that decisions made 30 years ago will be affected by Obama's plan. Retired folks now worked for companies (some their whole life) based on benefits.

We made good choices back then but Obama is going to dump the basket.

Back hoe I also worked for a company for many years as an engineer. My company began laying off the older ones that had been there a long time. I saw each year more paper work pushers and metric gathering that never affected the amount and quanitity of work. I saw the quality of work go down. They would bring in a new plan such as six sigma, and another one for the life of me I can not think of. They would try to keep most of the old ways of doing and incorprate parts and pieces of the new plan with them. Company was sold three times. Now under the last one there are vice presidents answering to vice presidents. They are farming out functions that were controlled in house and outsourcesing others out. Such as the print shop where an outside company bid to run. They come in and told all of the ex-company employees good news you still have a job with us. No benefits and one half your salary.

You plan for things to happen in your life, you may have planned ahead for thirty years out. But things change and you have to adjust. My wife and I made plans in case we lost our jobs. Some people do and some people do not. I was laid of twice in my working career. First time at 52, looked as if the world would end, but it did not. I was forunate to be able to go back to work and was laid of agin in 2002 6 months before I was 62.
My wife had lost her job five years prior at 59. The health insurance was the biggest expense in our budget until we reached 65 and could go on medicare. The company I was with established an annuity to continue the coverage with. We could buy insurance, pay doctors, and so forth. The insurance premium would take more than the monthly allowed from the annuity. The annuity stopped at 65. Now if the company pension you wotked for all your life should go bankrupt then who would you look to. The government for saw this happening and established a Pension Guarnty plan that would pick up any bankrupt company sponsered pension plans. The government had to pick up LTV and US steel plans when they went bankrupt. The pensions were not as much but were some. Could be that GM and Chrysler plans may have to be picked up by the governmet. Most company health plans stop or they are reduced at 65 to only pay for what medicare does not pay.
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Hurley one company I did work for went backrupt some 6 or so years after I left. I was vested in a small pension. The pension fund was sound and creditors filed a suit wanting part of it. They claimed it was overfunded. Eventually I was offered a buy out on that pension fund. I opted to take it. It was sure thing. If my wife and I both go, the kids will have the funds etc. If I live past 74 1/2 it was a bad choice. Except that in the mean time it is attaining growth in an interest bearing account which may be actually losing based on inflation that is forthcoming.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Faster horses said:
My question is: Why has Obama not tackled limiting the amounts
paid in Malpractice Suits?

I think it is because he would never limit his colleagues--LAWYERS.

To me, it is obvious because of it's omission.

I have made this statement several times but I will make it again. In Texas the malpractice claims are capped at $250,000. This was presented to the voters with the idea that it would lower healthcare cost, it passed and healthcare cost still rose at the same rate as the nation. I will point at one case a lawyer took and sued a dentist. The dentist pulled all the teeth for a man. He did not pull them he broke all of the roots off in the jaw bone. Never tiook an X-ray to acertian why the man was still having pain. Then he informed the man that he could not see him again. The man was paying out of his pocket. He went to another dentist and x-rays were done and an oral surgeon had to finish the job. The only thing the man wanted was to have his teeth pulled and when the job was botched he wanted the dentist to pay the rest of the bills that some one else had to finish. The dentist had mal-pratice insurance and that is who the man and his attorney had to fight. The man won his case. Now look at this and tell me who was at fault here and who should have to suffer and who should have to pay. A lot of doctors screw up and they should have to pay for their screw ups in my opinion.
 

Mike

Well-known member
The Texas limiting of "Pain & Suffering" jury awards is sort of a two edged sword..........

1-It has attracted more doctors to Texas since it was enacted because of the decline in malpractice insurance costs. Almost twice as many.

2-People who have malpractice claims say that attorneys are harder to find because of the decline in malpractice lawsuit income.

In the long run, you don't know if the cap has caused insurance to lessen it's increases or not.....which could be a savings that is hidden.
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Mike said:
The Texas limiting of "Pain & Suffering" jury awards is sort of a two edged sword..........

1-It has attracted more doctors to Texas since it was enacted because of the decline in malpractice insurance costs. Almost twice as many.

2-People who have malpractice claims say that attorneys are harder to find because of the decline in malpractice lawsuit income.

In the long run, you don't know if the cap has caused insurance to lessen it's increases or not.....which could be a savings that is hidden.

Mike, I like the provisions of the Texas limitations, and I dislike it at the same time.

When people go into the grocery store, drop a can of tamato sauce on their own toe, and suit for mega-bucks, something is bad wrong. That is why I like it.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
hurleyjd said:
aplusmnt said:
backhoeboogie said:
Obama's intent is clearly one sided to begin with. He's not going to these meetings to listen to the people, he's going to preach. His whole intent is to push his will thru.

Senators and congressmen and women have listened to the people. That is why we have the blue chips/blue dogs.

Most all of us who choose to be informed have already heard anything Obama poses at these meetings. Nothing is new. So if you go and listen to him, you're going to hear rhetoric and emotion. Professional common folks go to speak to him and they are essentially not being heard to begin with.

You mentioned FOX and CNN. Look at the ratings. A while back FOX owned all of the top ten news programs. Who do you think advertisers want to air their commercials with? Why do you think FOX is number 1?

My peers and myself at work have stayed with our company because of benefits. We have turned down very lucrative paying jobs elsewhere. Mostly it is because we are earning pensions and will have insurance upon retirement. If we chose to be job shoppers we would make significantly more money, but lose out. With the Obama plan, it doesn't matter. We should have tripled our salaries years back.

We fall under the "less than $250K crowd" but we all know we are going to pay, one way or another.

Corporate piracy is already vicious. We have lost practically all engineers that are under 30 years old. They have simply left for jobs above that threshhold. Of the 17 engineers we hired in 1993, one remains employed with the company. 16 have moved on. Most everyone working with me now has 30 plus years experience. That is a lot of knowledge to walk out the door if Obama wins. I suspect most all will take an early retirement for their pensions, and go triple their salaries at other sites.

Obama has not thoroughly looked at the ramifications of everything he has already done let alone what he intends or wants to do. It is just like he said in his election campaign over and over, "we're looking in to it but...." He doesn't know, doesn't have a clue, and has not yet understood what he speaks of.

Good point! We do not have the benefits that you do! But me and wife screwed up when young and did not have insurance, we corrected that and wife went back to college to get a profession within the Medical field for two reasons one because we thought we could find a job with good benefits and two because there was a need for her profession.

Obama now wants to mess with what we worked for and are plenty happy with. My wife could have made more money working for me, now that we planned Obama and others don't Obama wants me to pay for them. Crap we already paid for ourselves by missed money to go to college, by paying for college out of pocket, but now we will lose what we worked for and be forced to pay for someone else because they do not take personal responsibility like we did! :mad:

Could be if a government plan was available that you could afford then your wife could have worked with you and not had to go out to work.
Also if it was not for the government run medicare plan and mediciad plan your wife might not be needed now in the healthcare industry. This is just food for thought and I am not trying to slam you.

Probably would not change things any with Government plan, 1st insurance was only one of the she went back to work for, she also enjoys a nice contribution to her 401K that will pay off nice 20 years from now.

Also Social medicine does not have a good record of not needing people in the Health care profession. It is just the opposite, due to lower pay and more bureaucracy most likely more people will be needed not less as is the case in Canada.
 
Top