Why does everyone seem to be so near-sighted on the healthcare issue? The Utopian goal of healthcare for everyone, simply put, is a government penalty on those of us who have prospered. I have worked hard my entire life to be able to provide for my family. To extort any more of my hard-earned money to pay for someone who hasn't tried as hard as I have is a crime. I already see 25% of my wages scraped off of my paycheck every two weeks. Remember people, the government has no income other than taxes. Any increase in "free" coverage is just a way of making me, and others like myself pay premiums for other folks. Also as to the comment about Mr. Smith's VA coverage, there's a war on. Enlist and you too can reap the benefits of serving your country.

Ms.Cecilia Fox. the health care agreement was part of the bargaining process to get high qualified officers to work on the crack ridden streets of Akron and to put their lives in danger everyday so you can sit in your living room with your cup of coffee and write idiotic opinions.

and for your information the health care plan is not free, we pay each time we go to the doctor for services. so please try and educate yourself before you start spouting all that you think is right.

Ken Hoehn my problem is not with the president speaking to my children it is with the fact that he is hypocrite speaking to my children. He has no right to speak of achieving the American Dream by doing well, when every interview, every piece of legislation he ratifies reeks of killing the american dream. taxing the american dream, doing away with capitalism and forcing hardworking people to take care of the lazy.

when someone gives a speech about work ethic and taking care of yourself and your family then my child will be in the front row. until then I will decide what my child learns and is subjected to.

Cecilia D. Fox,

Amen! That goes not only for City of Akron employees, but countless other government-funded positions. The gravy train is running out of fuel and needs to be brought in for repairs.

@ Watching in Summit County - You are so right. I would not want my kids learning anything from Obama. The success rates for minority kids raised by single moms is so high, that it is a given he would achieve the things he has.

We need someone like McCain teaching kids how to be self sufficient. Born in military hospitals and exposed to socialized medicine, he was able to use his daddy's position to get in the Naval Academy. He excelled there and has been living on the government dime ever since. That is the true American dream and as soon as I become an Admiral and can get my son an appointment to the Academy, I am doing it.

@ Kimberly Kozy
------------------------------------------------
Although I don't necessarily disagree strongly with your points, I would however, point out that all that is required to substitute teach is a bachelors degree.

That Degree can come from any field. On a day to day basis you have many Subs who did not specifically go college to become teachers.

I'm not disagreeing with you, just point out that maybe you should do a little research.

@hitnrun74 - You are already paying for the uninsured to receive care.

Do you think that when an uninsured person shows up at the emergency room that the hospital just provides services out of the goodness of their hearts and don't attempt to recoup the money from the insured?

The "Utopian" goal is to have that uninsured person go to a primary care physician for a $200 visit rather than showing up in the emergency room for a $2,000 visit.

You are paying either way.

Mr. Harding has this exactly right. That decision not only opened the flood gates for the corporations but also the concept of "group rights" in general.

The Supremes have set many horrible precedents which have now become enshrined as law and trump the actual intent of the Constitution.

JohnGalt, Something to teach and a passion for imparting that knowledge would be helpful too. I am afraid that is missing from so much of public schooling.

K Kozy,

"...we should not accept less than the very best qualified teachers that we can offer."

That horse left the barn a long time ago. Besides, I thought strong parental involvement is what dictated educational success anyway.

Dear Watching: You are a RAVING LUNATIC. Enough already.

Great letters Kimberly Kozy and Ken Hoehn. Couldn't agree more with both of you.

Mr. Galt, a bachelor's degree may be all that is legally required, but that alone doesn't necessarily qualify a person to substitute teach. That bachelor's degree should be in education. Too bad it isn't currently. And as Ms. Kozy points out, there are already plenty of people substitute teaching right now who have that education degree and are trying to obtain full-time employment as a teacher. Those are the people who should be given priority. I was rather appalled at the mayor's statement that the people he dumped out of their jobs should move ahead of substitutes already out there and doing it.

@Cecilia D. Fox - I agree. Akron's city hall hero, and the part time council should be payin' for their second to none healthcare

@Cecilia D Fox

I have health care costs deducted in my pay stub every week, and I pay a portion for each visit to a Dr.'s office. If you could send me your research about who actually gets free health care, I would like to see it.
We do have good coverage offered to us through the city, but we also accepted less than cost of living wages for 6 years (2 Contracts) to keep it.

@manny1 - You should have had Homer Simpson negotiate for you guys. He took the keg of beer for instead of a dental plan.

Meant to say he took the keg of beer for the union meeting instead of a dental plan.

Everyone thinks everyone else is getting a better deal than they are. Even free military medical care for family members isn't free anymore.

I agree Khen, but I find no information available as to a cost savings for me if I pay premiums for all the currently uninsured or just cover their hospital walk-ins. Many uninsured do not abuse the hospital system and avoid medical care because of cost. The abusive individuals need to be addressed via any means necessary including denying coverage at emergency rooms. Turn them out and get them off of the dole and out of my pocket. All a public option will do is cause every other major provider in the nation to fail as they will not be able to compete for our business against such a huge monopoly. I have Blue Cross currently and I do pay a premium as well as copays. Given my choice, i would prefer to continue my current benefits, but if blue cross has to charge me 10 dollars (sarcastic example) per month as my premium in order to compete with a public option, they will surely go under. And there I am, stuck with something I don't want because someone else was unwilling to try. I'd personally like to thank everyone that abuses the system. You really motivate me to keep working hard and trying to better myself. Without your example of what a life without pride is, I just may find myself at the ER with a cold expecting you to foot the bill.

Ken Hoehn:

You are so right and as evidence look at the comment above from Watching in Summit County at 7:05AM.

He's obviously shielding his children of everything positive about our new president and likely filling their heads with Fox News brand hate filled demogoguery. Talk about promoting LAZY minds. Way to go Dad!

Jim Ballard:

Just for the record, there are not 46 million Americans without health care insurance. That figure came from the 2007 census, and it included 10 million immigrants that are not US citizens.

The GOP would have done well to avoid being called liars themselves by simply pointing this out correctly. Instead, they've tried to throw gas on the fire by suggesting these 10 million people are all here illegally.

Apparently, no one knows how to accurately assess how many of them are illegal and how many are not. But in any case, the real number (using 2007 stats, anyway) is closer to 36 million Americans.

They do not only go to the Er for service but we pay for their ride in a taxi.

@hitnrun74 - And I agree with some of your points.

I think the Obama administration has done a bad job in actually showing the benefits of health care reform.

It appears your solution is based on refusing care to those who can not afford it to keep costs down for everyone else. Although that is one possible solution, I don't think it is feasible.

If you are serious about actually researching and addressing the issue, do a quick search on the results of Arizona's public option. After a rough start, it has actually proven to be pretty successful.

I also don't agree with the idea that the public option would force private insurers out of business. I live in an area that is primarily military. Just an estimate here, but I would say about 25% of the population in the Norfolk area of Virginia uses the government-run Tricare health insurance. I am no longer in the military and use my company provided health insurance. When I visit the doctor, there is a pretty good mix of those using the public option and those using private insurance. I have not seen a health insurance provider in this area leave because of unfair competition from the government Tricare system.

@ Cecilia,
That comes out of the pay packages,its a negotiated item.Ive read stupid comments before.but this one was idiotic

hitnrun74:

We can assume that you have always worked harder than anyone else ONLY because of your assertion. Please tell me how you can conclude that someone else has not worked as hard as you or perhaps harder. Are you suggesting that the working poor don't work as hard as you because they're not prospering like you? They're the one's that need help to get affordable health care insurance.

nmax:

To the extent that some (small, I hope) portion of my money is earmarked to carry couch potatoes, I agree with hitnrun74.

But you hit it on the head with your point about the working poor. It's wrong to conclude that everyone who'd benefit from a government option is a deadbeat.

See there, a bit of common ground. Our only remaining disagreement would be with the way you and I define "help."

Since illegal immigration seems to be a big point of debate in the health care issue, this document from the Texas Comptroller in 2006 is pretty interesting.

http://www.cpa.state.tx.us/specialrpt/undocumented/undocumented.pdf

Because Texas doesn't have a state income tax (and relies on sales tax) the state actually makes a net profit on illegals.

Khen:

Interesting indeed.

Reason number 452 we should put aside all the posturing and take a serious, thorough look at a consumption tax. Right now there's way too much mudslinging on both sides of the aisle when it comes to our tax system (not to mention the "fair" tax), but it's clear to me that what we currently have isn't working.

Reason number one that we still have what we have? Too many million-dollar incomes in D.C. and elsewhere tied to today's fabulously complex system.

Kimberly Kozy, sure not everyone can teach, including some already in the profession.

Bob Trigg, well then you will need to address a lot of other issues too like high malpractice insurance for a start.

Ah, the old "take my money and give it to someone else" strawman.

So - if you already pay insurance premiums, you think that money is put in a "lock box" until you need it?

The insurance companies do the exact same thing - they take the money you pay and use it to pay other people's bills.

Except, they take out about 30 cents of every dollar to cover "overhead", including paying their lobbyists and marketing costs, and that necessary profit.

If that's OK with you, then live with it.

You'll get that chance.

But quit throwing out that ignorant "give my money to someone else" garbage.

It's intellectually dishonest ...

@AllJuiced1 said:"They do not only go to the Er for service but we pay for their ride in a taxi."

Nothing like incivility from someone who is already benefiting from socialized medicine.

And who was just complaining last week about how her tax-payer provided subsidy for the Medicare Advantage Program might be eliminated.

Hypocrite ...

Yo, Twitchy:

I guess I'd need some proof that someone was willing to reproduce with you before I'll believe your screed ...

@Melanie Wasson:

It must be a heavy burden sittin there on the other hand of God and passing out all that moral justice.

I'm sure you'd want people to judge you similarly if you had been accused of something, right??

Another self-righteous noodnik ...

@lbkswn mused:"Something to teach and a passion for imparting that knowledge would be helpful too. I am afraid that is missing from so much of public schooling."

Except all the pointy-head gawd-fearing parents can't let that happen.

It would contradict the dogma that they are force-feeding their uber-overachievers ...

I would really love to see how many of these talking heads on television and radio receive financial perks from the health insurance companies.

Seems to me you could make a pretty good living screaming against health care reform.

Never mind...there is an ACORN behind the tree over there.

@ cecilia fox. I'm with peebs. what a waste of ink.

@Melanie Wasson - John Case has not been convicted of a DUI yet. Ever hear of , "innocent until proven guilty". Punishment comes after conviction and you are in no position or authority to decide either. A judge or jury will make those decisions and not you or The University of Akron.

P.S. - refusing to take a breathalizer test is not a crime... contrary to one of our web expert's proclamation.

@truth sought... those who live in glass houses....

Dear Watching: My only hope is that you have not bred yet. If you have...have your kooky offspring stay away from me.

bilbo (from Lord of the Rings),

Sure, it may not be a crime per se, but Mr. Case sure will have a hard time getting to work per his automatic license suspension. I hope he gets judicial approval for an Interlock device..... or that you'll give him a ride to/from Akron U.

I bet Kent St doesn't hire boozehounds for their administrative positions.

Truth Sought,

Noted. Add Watching's kids to the current list of those not welcome in Mogadore. Updated list:


Watching in Summit County's kids
minorities

Melanie Wasson - John Case is a contract professional, which means he has an employment contract with UA that expires June 30, 2010.

He has been accused of a crime, but not convicted. UA cannot terminate his contract simply because of his arrest. If UA was to do so, Case could take the university to court for breach of contract, and the university could potentially pay much more in court costs than what they owe him for the remainder of his contract.

Obviously, you don't know how ANY institution, educational or otherwise, does business. Instead of doing a little research into the situation, you prefer an ignorant, knee-jerk reaction. Maybe you could do with a little further education yourself?

NTU1:

I've missed you. Back with a flourish today, I see.

Ignorant garbage, huh? Can't see how you can call "take my money and give it to someone else" anything but what it is: redistribution of wealth.

Doesn't mean there aren't plenty of good reasons to take my money and give it to someone else. But if it's my money, and the government is taking it, and then they subsequently give it to someone else.....well, gosh.

Maybe I'm just confused. Stupid of me to think it was really "my" money in the first place, I guess.

"My only hope is that you have not bred yet. If you have...have your kooky offspring stay away from me."

Your Mother's teaching did not stick huh?

Dear David DiCola: So are you also against wealth redistribution going upward???? The top 1% in this country now OWN 95% of our collective wealth. You ok with that??? Can a democracy funtion effectivly with this concentrated wealth??? I want you think REAL HARD in this one David.

@DavidDiCola said:"Maybe I'm just confused"

Please explain why it is not the same thing when the insurance company does it, but extracts a 30% "fee" in the middle for the privilege of doing business with them.

That is your money, too - money paid on your behalf in lieu of money put in your pocket.

That makes it better, how??

Come on ...

Today's post are very entertaining to say the least. As always, the Mickey Moore's drones are attacking the Donald Beck drones and vise-versa. It is very comforting to me that any of you have the right to vote. ( I am not saying that everyone falls into the DRONE category, those who do know who they are.)

@David:

Where was all the outrage when the wealth redistribution was upward?

Was it good to you??

Come on ...

Your envy aside, taking the fruits of ones labor is stealing, no matter the intentions.

@blkswn:

And your alternative, and assuredly superior, option is ....

Notusual
How can anyone opt out of the SS system? All workers except govt and clergy are forced to pay into the system. NOT a choice.
My dad tried to forgo the payouts but they insisted he take it and sent it anyway. Mom cashed the checks and had fun with the money. They did not need it.
I would have like to have kept 35 years of contributions but it was confiscated from my paychecks before I received the check. I payed for my ticket. That is not welfare.

@The_Original_Jason aka Einstein - In case you forgot, Dr. Case won't need a ride to work. He was suspended with pay but will do some work for the president from his home. How would you know what KSU does or doesn't do? Besides being an "expert" at legal matters are you also an "expert" at substance abuse issues too? Any institution that hires a large amount of people will always deal with "boozehounds" including KSU. It's a fact of life.

The University of Akron is the largest public employer in Summit County with 4,643 employees. It is bound to have employees with drug abuse issues including its administrators and so does KSU. Stop being such a competitive baby by changing the subject every time you see yourself loosing the original argument. We are talking about guilt vs. innocence and due process here and not transportation issues or what KSU supposedly does. You are a classic Ohio.com hack, Original Jason.

nottheusual1:

"@DavidDiCola said:"Maybe I'm just confused"

You must stop being so logical, David's brain may explode. It's the label "Capitalism", of course, that makes the difference.

bilbo (from Lord of the Rings),

Touche on the ride. I guess my serious suggestion of you chauffering him around isn't applicable.

You think I'm a hack? Oh no, I'd better change my user name to hide from everybody making fun of me, eh bilbo? Run along, son.

@AllJuicedOne said:"I payed for my ticket. That is not welfare."

You paid for Medicare. The Advantage program was a give-away of our tax dollars to the private insurance companies courtesy of John Kasich, who wants to be the next Ohio governor.

It was an amendment to an omnibus spending bill, which was put thru the then-Republican Senate in a reconciliation action. Hmmmm ...

It was supposed to prove how private insurers could do a better job of providing services, and was part of a plan to "reduce Medicare costs".

Instead, the taxpayers have continuously had to subsidize it for the private insurers to continue participation.

And in these plans, you are told which doctors and hospitals to use. Hmmmm ...

So - you are getting taxpayer subsidized medical care, beyond the Medicare program. Hmmm ....

And if it goes away, you can still buy it without the government subsidy. You can choose to.

But you seem to be hypocritically OK with someone else footing your bill ...

Hey dont forget what I put in yesterday about the article in Parade magazine.It said people are suing others for stuff that was written about them in a post,or blog,and they are winning.You cant lie about anyone,certainly cant slander anyone ,cuz all they have to do is print and they have it right there in black and white

So lets just be careful what we write,cuz theyre too many people that are sue happy and cant wait to get a case going.

(((((THE REAL JOKER: From Washington,DC)))))))

Why are you concerning yourself with an Akron,Ohio newspaper? Why are you taking the time to read our comments, to only put us down? I have an idea, _ _c_ O_ _! Stay in Washington,DC. Deal with your issues and leave us to deal with our own.

Ashley,

Joker is a satirical poster. He debuted as an anti-Obama poster, but has evolved into a third-party ideologue. He's local.

@nmaxxs:

An old practice of The Party and The Religious Wro -er- Right.

They feel that they can ignore simple thinks like facts, the truth and logic if it doesn't support their dogmatic view of the world.

Like the "all or nothing" rebuttals, where everything is purely black and white and anything gray is heretical.

Makes the view of the world very narrow ...

@AshleyHarvey - He is probably originally from the area. Believe it or not, some of us escaped. Reading the hometown paper is a nice way to keep informed about what is going on in our old hometown.

In every single version of the Health Care Bill that's floating around out there. They have a nice little provision in there. Want to know with it is?

If you have your own private insurance that the [government] doesn't like. You're going to be taxed 2.5% of your total gross income. Gee, that sounds pretty fair.

I DON'T THINK SO.

I'm completely against ALL of these bills that are floating around Washington right now. I want health care reform, but NOT LIKE THIS. Fix what's broken, don't put the entire USA on government run health care!

@peebs02:

There haven't been any cases where one "anonymous" poster was sued for flaming another "anonymous" poster.

And even The USA Patriot Act didn't take away our right to have an opinion.

No matter how hard Turd Blossom tried ...

"Oh no, I'd better change my user name to hide from everybody making fun of me, eh bilbo? Run along, son."

Thanks for helping to make my point, Jason. You really need to get out and build those social skills then perhaps this site and the people and handles being used on it won't be such a preoccupation for you.

@AshleyHarvey blurted:"I want health care reform, but NOT LIKE THIS. Fix what's broken, don't put the entire USA on government run health care!"

Why not?

You really care that much about who is paying the bill for you?

Come on ...

bilbo (from Lord of the Rings),

Stop. I can't take it.


Regards,
Jason13

NTU1:

Usually, your posts are well thought out and they make me stop and think. I like that about you.

This time, though, you are being silly. Here's why:

- I never expressed any outrage. Just wanted to correct your unfair use of "ignorant garbage."

- Also indicated there are plenty of good reasons to take my money and give it to someone else. I'll give you two examples: 1) taking my money to fund necessary national defense and 2) taking my money to provide temporary assistance (i.e. unemployment compensation) to those who truly need it.

- Sorry buddy, but there's no gray here. Even if I agreed with the way the government spent every penny they take from me, they are still taking it from me. I am sorry that you don't like the "resdistribution" word and all, but golly, logic would seem to indicate it's a pretty accurate adjective.

- Since you are so fiercly against "generalizations," I am surprised to see your use of the same when quoting 30% as "the number" related to insurance company admin fees. Depending on which study you believe, 20-25% is more widely accepted, even from those on your side of the aisle.

Speaking of "black, white, and gray," if you take more than a cursory peek at my posts, you'll see one of my strongest convictions is that truth nearly always lies somewhere in the middle.

P.S. At the risk of appearing even thicker in the head than I already may be, can you clarify what you mean by "redistribution of wealth when it was upward?"

@AllJuiced1 said:"My dad tried to forgo the payouts but they insisted he take it and sent it anyway. Mom cashed the checks and had fun with the money. They did not need it."

I couldn't let this bit of untruth pass by.

You aren't required to collect your social security benefits.

And you aren't required to cash the checks.

The money could have been given to people who need it - by your parents.

What an example of selfishness and BeeEss.

Truth:

Never said I was against redistribution. Just calling it what it is.

Sometimes, redistribution is more than a necessary evil. It's even downright advisable!

Now having said that, I suspect you and I are both in favor of SOME redistribution (such as examples I gave to NTU1). We'd likely also agree that SOME redistribution is, well, less agreeable. Such as taking my money (and yours) and giving it to someone (or some corporation) who is playing the system illegally in one way or another.

But to answer your central question, yes indeedy, I am perfectly OK with the wild majority of wealth being concentrated among so few people.

There are so many reasons why, that I dare say I should save everybody the pain of further windy posts and enlighten you another time.

@David DiCola:

I wasn't referring to you in my reply to nmaxxs, just commenting on tactical issues, unless you grabbed a pang of guilt there somewhere.

Still - my original comments remain unchallenged.

I could even stipulate that the "number" is 15% - does that change anything?

I'd give you points on everything else you've asserted if you'd just rebut what I wrote beyond the emotional dross and generalizations ...

@DavidDiCola:

Upward wealth redistribution?

There's been enough published about the demise of the middle class and how fewer and fewer people control more and more of the wealth in the US.

How much have your wages gone up the last 10 years compared to that and the rise in the premiums your employer pays for your insurance?

Wouldn't you have liked to have that in your pocket?

How's that different???????

@David DiCola stated:"But to answer your central question, yes indeedy, I am perfectly OK with the wild majority of wealth being concentrated among so few people.

There are so many reasons why, that I dare say I should save everybody the pain of further windy posts and enlighten you another time."

Awwww - come on - you can't throw a turd bomb like that and walk away.

I could use the laugh ....

I think the only way to reverse our governments bloated and unconsitutional growth is to .
Repeal the 16th Amendment.
or start electing Real Conservative Statesmen

Dear David DiCola: Explain yourself before you get ridiculed. So according to you.....more concentrated wealth is ok???? You got some explaining to do...my friend. If you would like to see "your perfect model"...I would suggest a day trip to Mexico. Are you ok with living in a cardboard box too????

"Are you ok with living in a cardboard box too????"

It is his choice isn't it?

NTU1:

No pangs of guilt. Guess I wrongly assumed that since nmax’s post was directed at me, so was your reply to his. I may also be a little overly sensitive to our battle a couple of days ago regarding race issues (never did see a reply from you on my last comments, btw).

Now to answer your question rather than issue a rebuttal: No! I am not OK with paying more for ANY product or service than I have to.

That’s why I prefer to have enough choices and competition available to force suppliers into offering good products at reasonable prices. I want to be able to decide what I value and pay accordingly.

For example, I personally don’t see any value in having to pay whatever percentage of admin costs that is related to insurance company lobbying expenses. Still, I understand why I have to pay them. It’s because our “Bee Ess” system currently allows it, and if insurance company “X” is active in D.C., then insurance company “Y” had better be also. Can’t compete as effectively otherwise.

Tangent: reason number 515 why I favor term limits. The cascading effect of removing career politicians fills my head with visions of sugar plumbs.

So, circling back to your question…we can argue all day about whether it’s better to pay the government a dollar or pay it to an insurance company. Either way, it’s a dollar coming out of my wallet. Past history and my sensible side, however, tells me this:

If we fix the system such that competition is enhanced rather than suppressed, I’ll pay less over the long haul via the private sector than I will to the government.

tginakron:
"...start electing Real Conservative Statesmen"

Ha-ha. When you find one, you'll let us know, right?

@David DiCola said:"If we fix the system such that competition is enhanced rather than suppressed, I’ll pay less over the long haul via the private sector than I will to the government."

An example of this ever happening? That's a tough one - I couldn't find a year that health insurance premiums/costs have dropped since they've been keeping records.

Michelle "I'm just as good as Sarah Palin" Bachman was spouting that stuff during The National Association of Pointy Heads over the weekend. Still not sure what values they stand for besides not liking people who don't agree with them.

And, wouldn't the guv plan be about all the competition there is today for the insurance co's?

There's 1300 of them (give or take) and if that isn't enough of a supplier-side to drive pricing down, what will?

As to our discussion about race: I didn't realize you'd replied to my "poopy shoe manifesto".

I'm glad you don't have stuff on your shoes. And, please don't take it too seriously - I'm attacking your positions to get you to think, not attacking you, personally.

I save that for the truly reprehensible.

That's why I enumerated the "response tactics" to nmaxxs. You've digressed down some of those paths a couple of times, and I think you've got a stronger intellect than that.

Have a great evening - I've got to go take care of some "community action" business ...

Truth, NTU1:

Oh, I'm pretty sure I will get ridiculed after I explain myself, too.

Here's a crazy idea, Truth:

There is no perfect model! Mine, yours, or anyone else's!

Cut through all the rhetoric, and at the end of the day we're arguing over what we think the best way to live (and be governed) is. I have come to terms with the fact that my idea of the best way to live and be governed is no more perfect than yours.

It's just better, in my humble opinion.

For me, it comes down to this: I believe the government's central responsibility is to ensure as safe and stable an environment as possible so that each of us can pursue his/her own goals.

I do not believe it's the government's responsibility to determine that the pay for one job is fair compared to the pay for another. To me, that means lots of guys are gonna make more money than I do. Some of them will make way, way more money than I could spend in five lifetimes.

Yes indeed, that's OK with me.

I've been in Mexico. I've been in China. I've seen what it's like to live in poverty. I also remember what it was like to live in a neighborhood where the occasional dead rat in our backyard was bigger than a baby raccoon.

I have no illusions about the possibility of having to live in a cardboard box one day. But if I do, I will not be curled up in the fetal position waiting around for the government to come along and give me a "fair" place to live.

Swan is right...satisfaction and happiness are purely matters of choice.

@Khen:
Your response to watching in summit county was absolutely perfect!

@Watching in Summit;
Part of the American dream involves paying taxes to receive that dream. Define Capitalism sir/maam. You said, "when someone gives a speech about work ethic and taking care of yourself and your family then my child will be in the front row. until then I will decide what my child learns and is subjected to."

The ironic part of your statement is that Obama's speech was exactly that.

Go ahead ... shield your children from all that you wish ... then they can grow up to be as uniformed as you.

Dear David DiCola: If I ever see you curled up in a card board box under the Rt 91/Cuyahoga River bridge I will stop and offer help. After I help you I will expect you to still support your views on "unfettered capitalism". Remember......most folks will ignore you and ridicule for being so stupid and poor. Remember that...David. Oh...I almost forgot......William McGuire...ex CEO of United Healthcare......2007 total compensation.....124.8 million. Sleep well my friend...and stay under cover. And watch out for those rather large river rats.

NTU1:

We shall be expecting big things from you in your community action efforts tonight.

I have time constraints of my own, so 1) I appreciate your comments and 2) just want to cite the airline industry as the prime example of how health care reform might best develop.

Adjusted for inflation, it's cheaper to fly now than it was in 1982. This isn't because we have 1300 airlines to choose from. In fact, it's almost the opposite.

The airline industry has consolidated in a big way over the last 30 years. Now, instead of having 15 different airlines to choose from when I fly from Cleveland to Chicago, I only have 6-8. That's still enough to ensure price pressure, but not so many that the companies' talent, resources and capital are so highly diluted.

The government has surely inflicted its share of regulation on the airline industry. But the consolidation was brought about by the industry and free market dynamics, not forced by the government.

Could be a similar scenario with health care. Open up competition across state lines, and we are not going to go from 1300 companies to 2600. There will be consolidation in a very big way, but there will still be plenty of choice and, along with additional measures, downward price pressure.

Not saying some type of safety net for truly needy people should be ignored, by the way. But neither should solutions from the right that could have significant, positive impact.

We can debate the facts about what is required to teach. All I am saying is that the only thing required to be a Substitute Teacher is a BA.

@AshleyHarvey:
"If you have your own private insurance that the [government] doesn't like. You're going to be taxed 2.5% of your total gross income. Gee, that sounds pretty fair. "

Oh geeez more lies ... thought I already put the truth out here on this phony tax. OK time to do it again ... It is NOT a 2.5% tax on your gross income. Lets look at the facts here:

18 ‘‘SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE
19 HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.
20 ‘‘(a) TAX IMPOSED.—In the case of any individual
21 who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at
22 any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed
23 a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of—

1 ‘‘(1) the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross in
come for the taxable year, over
3 ‘‘(2) the amount of gross income specified in
4 section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.
5 ‘‘(b) LIMITATIONS.—
6 ‘‘(1) TAX LIMITED TO AVERAGE PREMIUM.—

First - the tax is limited to not more than an average health policy.
Second - the tax is prorated if your lapse in coverage is prorated
Third - if you are poor you are exempt from this tax as you will be covered under medicare
Fourth - I researched 6012 of the Tax Code as well:

It only refers to whom must file. If you delve into this you will find it creates protections for surviving spouses.

The Bill and Tax code are difficult to read. However, line 6 above covers it by saying the tax can not be higher than an average premium price. So if you keep your cars, home and health insured, you pay no tax. This seems sensible enough.

I hope this has helped some of you better understand that you must not believe everything you hear or see on the web.

Once aqain here are your links:
HR3200:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt.

TRUTH INVOLVES READING - not just spreading the 'I heard thats'

hmmm wonder how much your financier Mr Soros makes? Or even your Charley Rangle for that matter.... But that being said, your envy and class warfare is just a diversion which they do appreciate btw...

You can always tell what side of the political spectrum someone is on by the educated/non-educated nature of their posts. Years ago we started hearing about the, "Dumbing down of America." When one political party tells you not to trust the government, think about it ... if you still can. Don't trust them. Dont trust Fox, MSNBC or CNN solely. Fact check or be silent people. Contrary to what you may believe, the government does NOT want to run your life. This is not to say we dont need to keep them in check. But really ... think about it people ... what does the government get if they win? More bills they cant pay? YOU are not worth that much to them.

"the government does NOT want to run your life. This is not to say we dont need to keep them in check. But really ... think about it people ... what does the government get if they win? More bills they cant pay? YOU are not worth that much to them."

It is hard to figure out your name. It does not want to run your life? More bills they can't pay? They run your life and they do not care if the bills are paid or not.

"When one political party tells you not to trust the government"

Why would you ever trust Government? The best I would say about trusting Government is Reagan's line, "trust but verify." The assumption all through history and paramount in the minds of the Founders was that corruption in government is inevitable. Their hope was that at least the Federal Government would be kept limited in the damage it could do. The States were free to do as this wished internally (outside of the few limits of the Constitution) and you the Citizen were free to "vote with your feet." Gotta love the word "free."

Concerning monopolies and competition to drive health care prices ... NTU1 - 1300 does seem like a large enough number to keep competition in the market. However, you must consider a few additional facts about the industry that interfere with a true free market health insurance system ... no matter how many players there are.

1] Choice: It is generally one's employer that makes the choice of which ins. companies to offer. Individuals have little choice for the same money as we can get at work.

2] Pricing: How can the average person possibly make an educated decision which plan may be best when there are so many rules as to what is and isnt covered?

3] Health Cost: Any industry that does not make its service prices readily available to the public reeks of monoply. Imagine not knowing what your groceries will cost until a month after you buy them. How about auto repair ... having no idea the price of the repair until your car is fixed. How about buyng a car without knowing its price until you sign.

These examples seem ludicrous but they are the reality of health care. Try asking a hospital for an estimate for any proceedure ... even something as simple as a broken leg. The health industry will always continue raising prices until we make them accountable for their pricing.

"These examples seem ludicrous but they are the reality of health care."


Not much point in responding every item of your post, but they are all the result of Government and Corporations getting together to the detriment of the individual.

@DavidDiCola - Interesting about the airlines and the cost of flights.

But the big guys have received plenty of federal handouts in the past. Not saying your thoughts on our healthcare system morphing into an airline-type setup are wrong, just that the airline system still relies on the fed for money.

@blackswan - the difference between politicians receiving golf trips from companies and lobbyists is that they have to report them.

"the difference between politicians receiving golf trips from companies and lobbyists is that they have to report them."

hehe, right you are. Hey, I wonder who wrote the rules?

FWIW - For those interested in the latest on the health care discussion, the Post had a nice summary of Snowe's proposed changes to the current Senate bill:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/09/olympia_snowes_amendments.html?hpid=news-col-blog

btw Airlines, specially with their recent surge, might be a good H1N1 short play.

FYI,
"Post had a nice summary of Snowe's proposed changes to the current Senate bill"

what do you like about it?

Serious questions for the libertarians and true conservatives on here. Obviously the federal government has several roles and responsibilities (not explicitly stated in the constitution) it has either been tasked with or just assumed over time.

Military - our founding fathers never envisioned us having a standing military. Obviously a larger role in international affairs and globalization has changed this somewhat. But, the Texas National Guard could likely take on most of the armies in South America by itself. One could make a case that only states would operate militaries and in times of national emergencies, a large scale army could be created by the different guards from the states.

Disaster response - We know FEMA works well (all of the faults in the response to Katrina can easily be blamed on the Dem Gov. and Mayor). Would states be better served by managing their own emergency responses to national disasters?

Intelligence - I find it ironic that most of the right constantly criticizes anything the government does, except when it is the CIA (they can never do wrong). Obviously this is one role that the states probably couldn't handle.

Disease Control - The feds manage national responses to infectious diseases and develops and disseminates vaccines. Would this be better handled by the states.

Border Control/Security - Obviously they are not doing something right when it comes to illegals, but they do manage port security etc.

FCC - Manages the public airwaves and charges telco providers for use of the spectrum. Would it be better if states ran this?

The above examples are cases where the government is tasked with a job not directly described in the Constitution.

Would you guys be happier if the federal government got out of those roles? This isn't a sarcastic question and I am curious to hear your responses.

http://health.yahoo.com/news/ap/us_med_more_alzheimer_s.html

WASHINGTON - More than 35 million people around the world are living with Alzheimer's disease or other types of dementia, says the most in-depth attempt yet to assess the brain-destroying illness — and it's an ominous forecast as the population grays.

The new count is about 10 percent higher than what scientists had predicted just a few years ago, because earlier research underestimated Alzheimer's growing impact in developing countries.

Barring a medical breakthrough, the World Alzheimer Report projects dementia will nearly double every 20 years. By 2050, it will affect a staggering 115.4 million people, the report concludes.

"We are facing an emergency," said Dr. Daisy Acosta, who heads Alzheimer's Disease International, which released the report Monday.

Help me! I think if I give more money to the health insurance industry they will take good care of me when... What was I writing about again? Oh yeah, never mind. I think that the plastic continent in the Pacific Ocean is growing again. In a few more years we can buy it and then it can become the 58th state to join the United (only if you agree with me) States of America. On a serious note, the debates here have really gotten good on here. Keep it up people, most of you have some really good points.

@blkswn - I think you have a serious issue with your blogging - you are on here almost as much as me:)

Seriously though - let's say Glenn Beck was getting $1 million a year from Blue Cross to help fight the public option. Not saying this is true, but if it were, what kind of requirements would be for him to disclose this? Obviously he would have to report the income or gifts on his tax return, but he would not have an obligation to report it to his viewers. Since his tax returns are private (and rightfully so) I don't believe there would be any way for someone to find out.

This goes for all journalists and media personalities. I just picked Beck because he is so vocal in his opposition to health care reform.

Khen, A thoughtful question, but your "not explicitly stated in the constitution" should have been reason enough for the courts to overturn many of them. Either that or if you want the Federal Government to do things, amend the Constitution.

Military: They may not have envisioned it, but they certainly debated and allowed for a standing army. They mistakenly assumed we would never aspire to become an empire.

Disaster response: should be left to the states. I never quite understood why I should pay for someone to live in Cape Cod or the Florida Keys.

Disease Control: not sure they are effective at all and the HHS is certainly a department you should keep an eye on.

Border Control/Security and Intelligence are part of national security and it is Constitutionally their responsibility.

FCC: another probably unconstitutional agency which I would keep a very sharp eye on.

You could also add in all of the supposed watchdog agencies for medical, insurance, financial, banking, energy, environment etc. They do not seem to be working very well either. And because of the the Federal take over in all of these areas, the dynamic of State control and a "competition of ideas" is now gone.

There is no reason for the Federal government to assume any responsibilities that it is not tasked with specifically, and certainly should not infringe on the States powers. Along those lines the 17th Amendment should be immediately repealed.

Khen,

Not saying this is true, but why would Blue Cross pay Glenn Beck 1 million to help fight the public option plan, when they could pay key Democrats in Congress and the President 2 million each for passing a law requiring ALL AMERICANS to get health insurance. Sorry, my dementia medicine is wearing off. Your avatar is out to get me. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!!!!!!!!!!

Melissa,
". . . so anyone now that is fat and or smokers has no impact on health care cost to an employer or myself? really?"

It's the diff between "HAVE TO PAY" --- as your 1st post said --- and "DO PAY."
Those of us who choose 2 carry group coverage pay 4 the fat people --- our choice.
If Bama-care happens, U have no choice.
Bama is anti-choice.

real joke,
Your avatar is disgusting.
RU trying 2 degrade the culture more than it already is.

@TheRealJoker - Obviously lobbyists are playing both sides of the fence and both sides are enjoying the perks from them. But at least when it comes to politicians, there is some semblance of accountability.

See Delay, Abramoff golfing trips to Scotland.

@blkswn - Intelligence activities (depending on the agency) are not clearly national defense in every case. Quite often in the past, they have actually run counter to the Constitution.

Did our founding fathers envision an FBI or CIA?

Intel services are a good example of how the rules have changed over time without amending the Constitution.

Your arguments also seemed to be based on how you felt the agencies were being operated.

Ok, you can leave out how I feel about their operation. FBI is in looking, CIA out, and I would say that they would nix them, but national defense can trump everything and the Commander in Chief has expanded powers with a declaration of war... if we are truly threatened.

I can not think of any Constitutional reason for intelligence gathering except for national defense.

You Have Got To Be Kidding Me wrote, " real joke,
Your avatar is disgusting.
RU trying 2 degrade the culture more than it already is."

No, your posts are doing a good enough job all themselves. If you look close enough at the picture in the avatar, you will see President Bush's face in it. The picture does a good job as portraying President Bush as the face of a warmonger. Sorry if the picture scares your little doggy. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NTU1
"Ah, the old 'take my money and give it to someone else' strawman...The insurance companies do the exact same thing ... ignorant ... garbage ... dishonest..."

UR awfully abusive 4 someone who only addresses 1/2 an argument. Course the argument WAS rather long -- 9 words -- so I spose U can B excused. I'll give U a 2nd try. I'll reverse the order 2 make it easy.
"...and give it to someone else." (no need 2 respond, U already did.)
"TAKE ... as in TAKE ... (that's latin 4 TAKE) ... my money..." (please respond).

@blkswn - The FBI gathers intelligence at home and abroad for both counter crime and terror. State Dept also does it for a wide variety of reasons that aren't specifically defense related. I am sure the Treasury Department also has intelligence activities that are used for a wide variety of missions.

Do you think our founding fathers would have been happy with a national domestic law enforcement and intelligence agency (FBI)? That was one of the things they were trying to avoid.

Orly Taitz has gone off the deep end.

http://wonkette.com/411198/birther-soldier-basically-fires-orly-taitz-who-claims-letter-birther-soldier-wrote-was-forged-etc-huh#more-411198

No I do not... again in time of war, by definition, anything is possible. Being an Empire now, we always can make the case that we are at war hence all of the foreign (and domestic) spying.

Perhaps if they would defend the borders many of these domestic intel problems would disappear.

@blkswn - I read somewhere that a large percentage of the population could be classified as libertarian based on the belief in individual freedom and I can agree with some of your points.

Our government is massive these days because our country is massive.

Think about when the Constitution was drafted. There was really no need to mention things like health care, because it really did not exist. There was no need for Social Security because the life expectancy was probably 40.

As our country grew, the role of the government changed.

Effectively defending the borders would require a massive increase in government spending. How much do you think it would cost to ensure that everyone coming into our country is authorized to do so? How much do you think it would cost to track down all visa overstays?

I am not saying we shouldn't do it, just saying that it would probably cost more than the health care plan.

Khen,

I really do think the philosophy behind the Constitution transcends the size of the country or the changes in our society. If government has a role in health care, Social Security, housing, etc. it is on the state level.

I am sure taking our troops out of, lets say Germany would easily cover the costs and provide the manpower for defending the borders.

As far % of population believing in individual freedom, I hope that what you read is correct, but it appears to me that most fail to defend it.

Joke
U should rotate the joke-face among all our powerful friends who whooped it 4 war, including Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, CNN, ABC, etc., etc.

Everyone 'cept the Dixie Chix and U.

KHEN,
Excellent questions.
Thanks to Swan for thoughtful answers.
My contribution:
I think they are all OK, either under "military," or "naturalization," or "general welfare," except for the FCC, althought it may be lumped under "commerce" somehow. If there are any Constitutional scholars listening, please chime in.

On your other point:
"Our government is massive these days because our country is massive."
Consider the distinction between massive in scale and massive in scope.
I think we all understand scale; George Washington's troops wouldn't quite get the job done nowadays.

The question of scope is what divides us.
What KINDS of things should a govt. do and not do?
So questions like yours can help us think these things through.

DiCola
First of all, there was no 2007 census. That's done every 10 years on the year that ends in 0. Second, 36 million is ok with you? Does the number matter?

HitNRun74, I spent 4 years in the military during and in the Vietnam war. I did earn the vets benefits you speak of. Hope you didn't have to.

Once again, I repeat...No one is proposing taking away your health care plan, just trying to cover those working and/or unfortunate people who don't have it. There are lots of hard working people in this country who are good citizens, who contribute and volunteer and are great neighbors, all the things you'd want an American to be who, through no fault of their own, have fallen on hard times, lost their health care or haven't been able to buy it because of pre existing conditions. My brother has had his own business for 30 years and makes a good living, but because he's self employed and moved to another state where he had to purchase a new plan, can't buy it for any price because he had a heart problem in between plans. And he can afford to buy the best plan you can offer. But he's not covered. He's not lazy or irresponsible, nor an illegal immigrant. What if that happens to your brother, or your wife or your child? These people who aren't covered are US and our families. Careful what you wish for. You could very well be next.

@DavidDiCola:

Regarding the airline analogy:

Health care isn't a commodity, beyond the basic services, which are being market driven as we see more and more services available in a clinic system, like those available at the local Acme stores, which I've actually used.

After that step, though, the line becomes very blurred.

For the airlines, the goal is to fill a seat. We don't want the goal of a hospital to be filling beds: We want their goal to keep people healthy enough that less beds need filled.

This flies in the face of commoditization, as what is a "product" isn't specific enough. And it still bothers me that it is important to make money off people's illness.

Why is that OK or even necessary??

Jim:

Sorry, I left out the word "Bureau." The Census Bureau estimated that in 2007, 45.7 million people were without insurance at one time or another. 21% of them were not American citizens, hence my stats (source was factcheck.org).

Never said I was OK with whatever the number is.

Khen:

Good posts, would love to go down the list with you if I had more time.

Meanwhile, good point about the gov't subsidies to airlines. I think it's bad business for the government to hand money to failing companies, but even if it does, the benefits of allowing the free market to prevail still occur.

Regarding airlines, here's an interesting article:

http://the-idea-shop.com/article/41/the-price-of-deregulation-subsidies

NTU1:

Thought provoking as usual.

I guess the easiest way to state my opinion on your post is to reiterate my inability to see a distiction between health care and any other essential-to-life product or service.

Thus, I'd have to ask, if making money via people's illness isn't OK, why not outlaw profits on food or home construction?

While you make a great point with your empty beds angle, I simply believe that the pusuit of profit absolutely drives innovation. Once incentive becomes negative instead of positive, innovation becomes a casualty.

Bottom line, cut to the chase, and all that happy mularky: best way to fix health care ('cause we agree it's broken) is going to be a compromise solution that includes elements from both sides:

- Maximize the market's ability to compete
- Reduce incentive for defensive medicine
- Promote incentive for choices that prevent disease
- Drive cost out of existing programs by holding the president to his word (cutting waste)
- Provide a safety net to ensure those who really need it have an out (we have that already for things like shelter or food, but need to do a way better job of minimizing fraud).

Still won't be perfect, but perfect ain't happening.

You Have Got To Be Kidding Me wrote, "Joke, U should rotate the joke-face among all our powerful friends who whooped it 4 war, including Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, CNN, ABC, etc., etc. Everyone 'cept the Dixie Chix and U."

I do try and rotate pictures of all of "our powerful friends" as often as I can. We all know that it was not just President Bush, but the buck has to stop somewhere.

Dear Cecelia Fox and OriginalJason, Why does the general public seem to forget that all City of Akron employees, police included, also pay taxes. So in essence, they ARE paying for their health insurance as well as their own salaries by paying the same taxes that you are whining about.If you take the time to actually think about what you write before you write it, then maybe you wouldn't look as stupid!