Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Blogs | Writers | Paid | My Orble | Login
 
Welcome to Smooth Political, Part of the "Daily Outsider". Enjoy Your Visit!!! @import url(http://www.google.com/cse/api/branding.css);
Custom Search

The Latest Adventures of the Party of No



The Party of No is on a rampage. The Republicans have promised a hot summer for the Democrats and have made a committment to do what needs to be done to insure that the President does not succeed. It seems as if the President fails, it means that the country has failed. Special interests groups will not give up without a fight. What is unfortunate is that these people who are agitating against what they call "socialism", have no backup plan or have no suggestions except the old tired solutions of tax cuts. And then what?

56
Vote
Add To: del.icio.us Digg Furl Spurl.net StumbleUpon Yahoo

   
subscribe to this blog 


   

   

[ Link ]
August 5th 2009 @ 07:04

Posted By: Mike Pouraryan - Category: No Category

Related Posts:

Comments
6 Comments. [ Add A Comment ]


Angry Electorate
1. August 6th 2009 @ 06:37. PopulistConservative Says:
Mike, you act like the GOP matters. They don't. The Democrats own the White House. They control the House with overwhelming numbers. They have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. The onus is entirely on them. The GOP is like a poodle nipping at the heels of a giant. Who cares if the GOP is the "party of no" (which is a term always ascribed to the party out of power, BTW -- the Dems were the "party of no" four years ago)? Unless the Dems are the party of yes, then they will be viewed as an abject failure. The GOP is irrelevant when it comes to making policy right now. And it doesn't matter if they have a plan. The Dems have shut them out (with the exception of one or two moderates).


Outsider Views:
Smooth Political
Kitten Politics
2. August 6th 2009 @ 08:20. Mike Pouraryan Says:
Hi there,

Thank you for your visit and your comments...appreciate it very much....

The problem is that if they create enough noise, the effort will be derailed. We will then all lose.





Angry Electorate
3. August 6th 2009 @ 08:41. PopulistConservative Says:
Mike, I want reform, but I don't want these crappy bills being offered up by the Democrats right now. If health care costs are too high (and they are), then Congress should be focusing on controlling costs. Make health care affordable for everyone. According to the CBO, these bills offered up right now will result in higher health care costs than if we did nothing. And I'm sick of this lie about the 47 million uninsured Americans. About a fifth of them aren't Americans at all -- they're illegal aliens. Quite a few more have insurance under their spouses' insurance plans. I read that the total # of uninsured who actually want insurance is more like 10 million. Does it really make sense to create a $900BB to $1.5TT entitlement program just to ensure those folks? And if this is like other programs, the total cost is being grossly underestimated.

Have you noticed that none of the bills address tort reform and the practice of defensive medicine (doctors running lots of tests for fear of being sued)? The trial lawyers are buddies with the Democrats, so none of the plans will dare to broach the subject.

I'm no fan of insurance companies, but I don't trust the government with yet another entitlement program. Sure, Medicare and Medicaid pay the bills for a lot of folks, but both programs will be completely bankrupt in a few years. Why does anyone think the government is capable of running another entitlement program? We should focus on cutting costs -- even if it involves cost controls -- but the notion of letting the government control health care scares me to death.


Outsider Views:
Smooth Political
Kitten Politics
4. August 7th 2009 @ 07:33. Mike Pouraryan Says:
hi there,

Appreciate your thoughts and your concerns.

What I am about to note is quite selfish...I want to be able to have the opportunity to have the same healthcare plan that members of Congress have. Right now, it is a pipe dream. The fact does remain that although the majority of Americans do have "access" and have insurance, the fact is if something happens, all bets are off. If and when there is a preexisting condition, no one will touch you. It seems to me that we have to figure out a better way. The majority of those who have insurance are way underinsured. These are the challenges....

As for your thoughts on controlling costs, where do you start? Asking for voluntary reductions? That has already been tried...as for the insurance companies, they are calling the shots..and the sophisiticated lobbying effort by groups like Freedomworks and the rest of the K-Street Crowd is geared to let things be the way they are. If the road we're in does continue, we sure will be on the road to no where.



Angry Electorate
5. August 7th 2009 @ 19:33. PopulistConservative Says:
Mike, did you know that the Congressional plan allows them to choose from among 20 or so different health care plans. That's exactly what we ALL should have and that's one of the things I want -- a plan where companies have to compete against each other for our business. We need to get rid of these stupid rules that prevent folks from shopping for health care across state lines. I read that there are 1400 health care companies in the country. Why can't I pick from all of them? Governmental regulations won't let us. If we could, that type of competition would help in greatly driving down costs.

Also, the ABA has the Dems in their pockets. If they didn't, we could have a chance at tort reform. I read that lawsuits (often frivolous lawsuits) only contribute about 1% of the health care costs. However, that doesn't include the amount of wasteful and costly procedures that are used by doctors who are practicing defensive medicine. If we were willing to put some REASONABLE limits on irresponsible malpractice lawyers, doctors wouldn't have to practice defensive medicine and costs could go down.

We need standardization of forms and automation of patient records. If you get that, you could cut costs. Now, lots of money is wasted on bureaucratic hurdles that are unnecessary.

Something else that could help is to increase the number of students allowed into medical schools. You don't want to flood the country with doctors, but if you have a higher number of doctors, the prices they can get away with charging would go down.

And, for pete's sake, get the illegal immigrants out of the country. They shouldn't be getting free health care (in emergency rooms or via UHC) because they shouldn't even be here. We let in more LEGAL immigrants than any country in the world. We have dozens of guest worker programs. When we're flooded with illegal immigrants, we also absorb their health care needs. We can't be the welfare system for the world. Obama has said his plan won't cover illegal immigrants, but Congress also didn't put any provision in place to check documentation and stop them from getting covered under UHC. Also, Obama plans to have another amnesty, so the illegals won't be illegal much longer if Obama has his way. Either way, he plans on getting them health care.

I do think some of the parts of the UHC plans are good. We need to stop discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions. It would be great to decouple health care from your employment status.

The bottom line, though, is that health care costs are too high. We should focus like a laser on bringing those costs down so that people can have affordable health care, instead of adding a new $1 trillion entitlement that will probably cost us 10 times the projected figures we're discussing now. Government has proven that it cannot manage these types of programs without bankrupting them because they never control costs. Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security? They're all nearly bankrupt or on the path to bankruptcy. How are we supposed to pay for all this? And the Dems want to add even more to it? We're broke. Busted. We just can't keep adding more and more debt.

One other thing -- Obama can't cover the cost of UHC by taxing just the rich. They're already starting to talk about raising taxes on everyone just to cover their current projections (which, I'm sure, are hugely underestimated). And Obama wants to help pay for it with savings realized from Medicare cuts. How stupid is that? If we can find savings with Medicare cuts, why don't we use that to...SAVE MEDICARE? Medicare is going bankrupt. Taking any savings we can wring out of it and applying those savings to a new entitlement program isn't going to help Medicare.


Outsider Views:
Smooth Political
Kitten Politics
6. August 8th 2009 @ 06:19. Mike Pouraryan Says:
Hi there,

This is great...i love it!!! Appreciate your thoughts...

Although no bill is perfect, many of the things you're talking about are being touted right now...and hopefully thru the continued negotations going on will be implemented. What I am hearing is that you and I both agree that the road we are on now is truly the road to no where!!!



Add A Comment

To create a fully formatted comment please click here.


CLICK HERE TO LOGIN | CLICK HERE TO REGISTER

Name or Orble Tag
Home Page (optional)
Comments
Bold Italic Underline Strikethrough Separator Left Center Right Separator Quote Insert Link Insert Email
Notify me of replies
Your Email Address
(optional)
(required for reply notification)
Submit
More Posts
May 2012
3 Posts
April 2012
4 Posts
March 2012
1 Posts
Older Posts
392 Posts dating from June 2008
Email Subscription
Receive e-mail notifications of new posts on this blog:
0
[ View Blog Summary ] [ Create A New Post ] [ Add A Comment ]

Mike Pouraryan's Blogs

32013 Vote(s)
362 Comment(s)
588 Post(s)
83829 Vote(s)
671 Comment(s)
1808 Post(s)
Moderated by Mike Pouraryan
Copyright © 2012 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]