Rep Waxman Taken To The Hospital

Representative Henry Waxman was taken to the hospital after he fainted in his office. The nearly 70 year old California politician is at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles for testing. One can bet the farm that he will be receiving the best care around and that taxpayers will foot the part of the bill not covered by his government provided insurance. They will spare no expense to take care of him.

If he were under Obama care he might be told that fainting 70 year old men do not warrant a battery of tests to figure out what is wrong.

I think someone told him he forgot to make sure he got rich off the cap and tax bill he authored and he fainted from the shock.

Big Dog

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

39 Responses to “Rep Waxman Taken To The Hospital”

  1. Blake says:

    He probably fainted from jealousy after he found out how much insider money Ed Markey will stand to make if this passes.

  2. Darrel says:

    He will have good care. He is on a socialized medical plan. We should all be so lucky.

    If he were not a senator, he would still be covered, because the US does have a socialized medical plan for seniors. This will not change under any plan by Obama.

    You provide no evidence that any part of his bill wouldn’t be covered by his “government provided insurance.” You just made that up.

    In Arkansas, Gov. “Huckabee signed legislation to create a health insurance program which extended coverage to children of lower-income families, to be funded in part by Medicaid, SCHIP, and a tobacco industry lawsuit settlement.[8] The program, ARKids First, reduced the number of uninsured children to nine percent (compared with 12 percent for the nation) in 2003.”

    Good job Mike.

    D.
    —————-
    “ARKids First health insurance provides two coverage options for more than 70,000 Arkansas children who otherwise might have gone without.”

    • Big Dog says:

      Sorry Darrel, I made nothing up. Even with the best government plan there are out of pocket costs.

      He does not have a socialized plan, he pays for one of the PRIVATE insurances offered to federal employees. When I say government provided I mean provided by the government as an employer. He still pays the employee portion and he pays the portion not covered.

      However, I believe that this will be considered a work related incident and the government will foot the entire bill.

      You seem to lack the ability to see that we taxpayers are the ones who pay for socialized medicine.

      I should not have to pay the premiums for others.

      There are always government plans that provide. I have issues when we cover people who make 100k a year. I have issues when we cover people who have a house, two cars, cell phones and cable TV for all the big screens they own.

      I don’t have to worry about this. I know too many doctors. If we have this system forced on us and it goes bad we should shoot everyone who voted for it and everyone who said it was a great idea. Bye Darrel…

      • Darrel says:

        Actually, you backed nothing up.

        Obama says we all should have the option of having coverage as he does as senator. Now you say “he does not have a socialized plan.”

        Therefore, you must not consider Obama’s plan “socialized.”

        Bigd: “we taxpayers are the ones who pay for socialized medicine.”

        DAR
        Yes we do. Now it’s time to stop flushing most of that money down the tubes. Time to improve the delivery of our socialized medicine.

        Bigd: “I should not have to pay the premiums for others.>>

        DAR
        I agree. You and I shouldn’t have to carry Blake’s coverage anymore. And, because we are feeding the profits and inefficiencies of 1,300 insurance companies, we are not only paying for the freeloaders who don’t pay for their own risk, we are getting hosed and paying WAY too much.

        As already shown, there is wide support among the public for a government option (about 70%) but now even most republicans support it too.

        Everything Hillary predicted has come to pass. I asked my aunt and uncle (mid 50’s with no health problems) what they pay for insurance. $13,200 per year with a $5,000 deductible. My grandmother is visiting from Canada. She bought 3 weeks of coverage to cover her time down here. $466 (Cad). She’s staying a little longer now and will probably end up paying more for these weeks of coverage than she did for her plane ticket. It’s a national disgrace.

        At current rates of increase, in ten year a moderate sized family could be paying $36,000 per year for insurance. How long are Americans going to put up with this greed and stupidity? Not very much longer.

        And then you speak of guns and violence. Well, when you are intellectually out of ammo, what else can you do?

        D.

        • Blake says:

          Actually Hussein lies, Darrel- I am sorry if you are one of his dogs that lie at his feet and cock your head at the sound of his voice, but when he opens his mouth, he lies.
          I do find it incredible that so many venal people are willing to overlook the good of this country just so they have a chance to line their pockets in a bold grab for money over public welfare, but greed seems to rule your liberal party, and after all, if you tell a lie often enough, people even begin to believe it.

        • Blake says:

          Your numbers are nothing but scare tactics, and not relatable to the real world.
          Dog does not pay for me. d- neither do you – I am self pay, and have always been able to do so- I’ve done quite well with my investments, how are your goats?
          Oh by the way, We are having Cabrito fajitas for the fourth- a bunch of us thought we wold cater to the party we are having for servicemen in our area- several have assured me that they have developed a taste for goat, and fajitas are a good vehicle for the food- kinda like pita bread.

        • Darrel says:

          BLK: “am self pay, and have always been able to do so-“>>

          DAR
          That’s nice. This tells us nothing about what the future holds. See Inductive reasoning.

          Observe:

          “…one-third (35 percent) of the total cost of health care services provided to people without health insurance is paid out-of-pocket by the uninsured themselves.

          Who pays the rest? Families USA answers this question in Paying a Premium: The Added Cost of Care for the Uninsured. The remaining sum (almost $43 billion in 2005) is primarily paid by two sources: Roughly one-third is covered by a number of government programs, but two-thirds is paid by people with health insurance through higher premiums.

          Across the nation, the premium costs for family health insurance coverage provided by private employers will include an extra $922 in 2005 due to the cost of care for the uninsured; premiums for individual coverage will cost an extra $341.”

          LINK

          You’re a mooch. A freeloader. And we all are carrying the cost of your risk.

          BLK: I’ve done quite well with my investments, how are your goats?>>

          DAR
          My goats are lawn mowers and pets. For investments, I buy houses and properties and rent them. I too would like to freeload on the system like you but I don’t want to risk losing it all. So I buy health insurance, for me, and apparently, for you.

          BLK: We are having Cabrito fajitas for the fourth->>

          DAR
          I had some goat for the first time in Jamaica this spring. It was okay. I didn’t tell my goats. Except for chicken and fish I am pretty much vegetarian now. It’s healthier.

          D.
          —————–
          “My refusing to eat flesh occasioned an inconvenience, and I was frequently chided for my singularity, but, with this lighter repast, I made the greater progress, from greater clearness of head and quicker comprehension.” –Benjamin Franklin

          You might try it and see if it helps.

          • Big Dog says:

            You would only be paying for him if he used money provided by you. Since he does not then you are not paying for him.

            Back in the 1960s, Castonguay chaired a Canadian government committee studying health reform and recommended that his home province of Quebec — then the largest and most affluent in the country — adopt government-administered health care, covering all citizens through tax levies.

            The government followed his advice, leading to his modern-day moniker: “the father of Quebec medicare.” Even this title seems modest; Castonguay’s work triggered a domino effect across the country, until eventually his ideas were implemented from coast to coast.

            Four decades later, as the chairman of a government committee reviewing Quebec health care this year, Castonguay concluded that the system is in “crisis.”

            “We thought we could resolve the system’s problems by rationing services or injecting massive amounts of new money into it,” says Castonguay. But now he prescribes a radical overhaul: “We are proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so that people can exercise freedom of choice.”

            Castonguay advocates contracting out services to the private sector, going so far as suggesting that public hospitals rent space during off-hours to entrepreneurial doctors. He supports co-pays for patients who want to see physicians. Castonguay, the man who championed public health insurance in Canada, now urges for the legalization of private health insurance.

            In America, these ideas may not sound shocking. But in Canada, where the private sector has been shunned for decades, these are extraordinary views, especially coming from Castonguay. It’s as if John Maynard Keynes, resting on his British death bed in 1946, had declared that his faith in government interventionism was misplaced. IBD Editorials

            The guy that proposed it thinks that the private sector should be involved.

            Tell your Canadian wife that while she is rolling her eyes she is free to go back to HER country. If it is so great you two should live there.

            • Darrel says:

              Bah. He’s an eighty year old French man. Probably senile. Just kidding!

              This debate of “extra billing” has raged in Canada for decades. Some are for it (the rich) others are against (the not rich). Castonguay is for it. No big deal. He is for a surcharge of maybe $25 per doctor visit to help cover the cost. From his wiki blurb:

              “The Castonguay task force released in Februaury 2008 said Quebec residents should pay $25 for every visit to a doctor. The report also called for an increase of up to one percentage point in the Quebec sales tax to help pay for medicare.”

              I have no problem with this. Nor do I have a problem with some private sector involvement.

              So this is nibbles around the edges. Perhaps Canada could benefit from some private sector competition. Make sure to keep the government on it’s toes.

              As Castonguay’s wiki blurb states:

              “While concerned about the financial stresses the system places on the government, Castonguay does not advocate dismantling publicly financed health insurance altogether.”

              Your Investor Daily article is standard rightwing crap with all of the usual distortions about Canadians flocking to the US. These are lies right-wing Americans love to pass around for some reason. But they aren’t true. Already roasted with scientific references provided.

              BIGD: “Tell your Canadian wife that while she is rolling her eyes she is free to go back to HER country.”

              DAR
              We plan to. A nice month long vacation, coming right up. Victoria, Vancouver, Okanogan Valley. The fruit is awesome this time of year!

              My wife was rolling her eyes at your claim (different thread) that it was illegal for Canadians to get medical care in the US. That’s pretty funny. Ridiculous actually.

              Bigd: “If it is so great you two should live there.>>

              DAR
              Think of us as missionaries, here to help teach where “the need is great.”

              D.
              ——————
              “I live…
              For the cause that lacks assistance,
              For the wrong that needs resistance,
              For the future in the distance
              And the good that I can do.”
              -Linnaeus Banks

            • Big Dog says:

              Does your wife have problems understanding English? I believe that I wrote a question asking if it were illegal and then said if it was …then…

              I did not know. Turns out it is illegal for them to get private insurance for things the government covers. I asked a question but she assumed I made a statement. This ? is a question mark. It indicates an interrogative statement designed to illicit a response

            • Darrel says:

              BIGD: Does your wife have problems understanding English?>>

              DAR
              Not at all. You know women. Really good with language… and speaking.

              BIGD: I believe that I wrote a question asking if it were illegal>>

              DAR
              Yeah. It was a ridiculous question. Well worth an eye roll. I was in fact doubled over. Really. No big deal.

              D.
              —————–
              What you said:
              “Only 90 answered that they had not gone elsewhere for treatment.”

              Actually, only 90 answered that they HAD.

              “Isn’t it against the law in Canada to do that? If so, why would anyone admit to committing a crime?”

              That’s really funny, sorry.

            • Big Dog says:

              No one needs you to teach here. They need it at home.

            • Big Dog says:

              It is always distortions when it is something different than what you say. The IBD piece was written by a guy involved in a Manhattan Institute study.

              “Year over year, Canadians have identified that their confidence in their health-care system is eroding,” said former CMA president Sunil Patel.

              The reason is simple and the problem is structural.

              In theory, Canadians enjoy an almost ideal system — the government pays for all necessary health care, which is delivered by private practice physicians and independent hospitals. The day-to-day reality is starkly different. When Canadians need care, they face a series of waits: one for access to a primary care doctor, another for access to scarce diagnostic equipment, and another for the necessary procedure.

              Between 1993 and 2003, the median waiting time from referral by a general practitioner to treatment increased by 90 percent, from 9.3 weeks to 17.7 weeks, according to an annual survey of physicians by the Vancouver-based Fraser Institute. For cancer patients, the waiting time for medical oncology more than doubled from 2.5 weeks to 6.1 weeks, and the waiting time for radiation oncology increased from 5.3 weeks to 8.1 weeks. Fox

              The Canadian system is built around a compulsory public-insurance regime that provides most medical and hospital services free. Of course, it is not free for the taxpayer, who finances the system at a rate of 22% of all taxes raised in Canada. The Canadian government pays about 71% of total Canadian health care expenditures, compared to 44% paid by the government in the U.S. This translates into public health expenditures of 7% of GDP in Canada and 6% in the U.S.—a rather small difference. The difference in total expenditures is due to higher private expenditures in the U.S. Why are private health expenditures so low in Canada? The main reason is that they are illegal, which gets us to the heart of the system’s hidden costs. The Independent Institute

              About the author: Pierre Lemieux is a Research Fellow at The Independent Institute in Oakland, California, and Associate Professor of Economics at the University of Quebec at Outaouais in Canada.

              Since the spring of 2006, Ontario’s government has sent at least 164 patients to New York and Michigan for neurosurgery emergencies — defined by the Globe and Mail newspaper as “broken necks, burst aneurysms and other types of bleeding in or around the brain.” Other provinces have followed Ontario’s example.

              About the author: Gratzer is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a physician licensed in both the U.S. and Canada, where he received his medical training.

              It is not all you Canadians make it out to be. Seems to me that if it were so good there you would be there year round. The US must offer so much for you to be here. We don’t want the Canadian system. If you do, go back.

              As for the 72% that “want” government run health care per NYT/CBS, that has been debunked as invalid. 2:1 Obama voters polled. Not a statistically accurate poll.

            • Darrel says:

              BIGD: [quote] “The Canadian government pays about 71% of total Canadian health care expenditures, compared to 44% paid by the government in the U.S. This translates into public health expenditures of 7% of GDP in Canada and 6% in the U.S.—a rather small difference.”

              DAR
              Look how profoundly dishonest this is. In 2005 the US spent “13.7 percent of its gross domestic product on health, while Canada only spent 8.7 percent.”

              Way more, yet these clowns try to hide this huge, multi-hundred billion dollar waste of money by not referencing the actual amount spent. Who cares what the government spends! That’s our money, every bit of it. What matters is the actual overall cost and Canada blows the US away in savings (which I have repeatedly detailed over and over).

              Bigd:[quote]
              “Since the spring of 2006, Ontario’s government has sent at least 164 patients to New York and Michigan for neurosurgery emergencies…”[/quote]

              DAR
              From 2006 to when? Canada has some arrangements with some hospitals for some procedures. I bet some states have such arrangements with other states. This allows areas to specialize.

              Ontario (where I was born) has a population of 13 million people! And over a period of years, in emergency situations, they sent 164 people (.0013%) across the border to see some fellow who may have been a world specialist in some specific, emergency, neurosurgery category? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

              BIGD: “It is not all you Canadians make it out to be.>>

              DAR
              I never said it was the best. It may not even be in the top ten. But it causes the population to be FAR more satisfied than in the US. Gallop asked, the people answered. It’s not even close. Why do YOU think that is? Not enough republicans in the poll? [snort]

              BIGD: Seems to me that if it were so good there you would be there year round.>>

              DAR
              I am busy tuning a thousand pianos a year. And then there are the goats. They get grumpy when I’m gone. Grumpy goats get out and get into trouble, and into the neighbors garden.

              BIGD: The US must offer so much for you to be here.>>

              DAR
              It does. I am very pleased. But the healthcare system? Unworkable. Too expensive.

              BIGD: We don’t want the Canadian system.>>

              DAR
              Agreed. But that’s not on the table. Americans do want a government option, by a wide margin. Even most republicans want it.

              BIGD: As for the 72% that “want” government run health care per NYT/CBS, that has been debunked as invalid.>>

              DAR
              No it hasn’t. It was a scientific poll of the American people. Not political parties.

              BIGD: 2:1 Obama voters polled. Not a statistically accurate poll.”>>

              DAR
              Sorry, I debunked your debunk already, at least twice. Your complaint is *ridiculous.* Think about it. Any poll of Americans is going to catch more self identified demos than repubs. Sorry about that. That’s the way it is. No way around that. This is because there are fewer of them because your party has a reputation similar to “dogfood” when it’s past it’s date.

              Are you suggesting that a poll should keep trawling the public until they get an even number of repub/demos? And then I guess they should toss the extra demos to even it out?
              You don’t know anything about polling do you? It’s a random poll of the American people asking if they want a public option. 72% said yes. That’s the answer.

              Imagine a poll asking who you are going to vote for and more people said Obama (which of course would happen). Would you say it wasn’t accurate because more people in the poll were democrats? Really? THINK!

              This is what the public wants. Whether they are demo or republican, is *irrelevant.* The fact that more demos show up just reminds us once again of the demise of your party.

              D.
              ——————
              Meet the future:

              “In surveys conducted between October 2007 and March 2008, 58% of voters under age 30 identified or leaned toward the Democratic Party, compared with 33% who identified or leaned toward the GOP.”
              LINK

            • Blake says:

              Hell yea, Canada saves money- its waaaaaay cheaper to bury someone than to treat them. You are absolutely correct, D.

            • Darrel says:

              BLK: “heaper to bury someone than to treat them.”

              DAR
              The US buries them sooner than Canadians do. Canadians live longer.

              Canada’s system treats/covers all of it’s populace, has better numbers in nearly every category, including outcomes, and it does it for far less the US does. And populace satisfaction? There’s no comparison, as I have documented.

              As I’ve mentioned and referenced, the US wastes about $209 billion a year just in paper shuffling. This would pay for Canada’s healthcare system, top to bottom, 1.5 times.

              D.
              —————-
              “Obama Boost: New Poll Shows 76% Support For Choice Of Public Plan”

              “New poll numbers from NBC/Wall Street Journal… 76 percent of respondents said it was either “extremely” or “quite” important to “give people a choice of both a public plan administered by the federal government and a private plan for their health insurance.”

              LINK

            • Blake says:

              Canadians do not really live longer, it just takes longer to determine if they are dead, or just frozen in place.

            • Darrel says:

              BLK: Canadians do not really live longer, it just takes longer to determine if they are dead, or just frozen in place.>>

              DAR
              Hey, the wife says that one is pretty pretty funny!

              D.
              ————-
              US longevity: 77.7 years
              Canada: 80.1 years

              (2005)

            • Blake says:

              Canada already has a private option for those who do not want towait until they are in stage 4 cancer- it is two pronged- the first is private clinics that charge a for-profit charge. You know, so doctors can actually make money (its called Capitalism)- the second prong is to come to the United States, so they can be seen right away.
              If the US gets socialized medicine, where oh where will
              Canadians go?

            • Darrel says:

              BLK: “If the US gets socialized medicine, where oh where will Canadians go?”

              DAR
              More like, where will the Americans go? Oh, they will be able to stay home and receive care in their own country rather than sneak across the border to get some help. Examples provided upon request.

              D.
              ————–
              Americans Who’ve Used Canada’s Health-Care System Respond to Current Big-Lie Media Campaign”

            • Blake says:

              Its a proud tradition for liberals and cowards to flee north to Canada.
              There you go talking about your goats again- I would have thought you might wish to protect the good name of your women more, but you like to brag, I see.

            • Blake says:

              You keep rolling out that old Banks chestnut- its overplayed, and overvalued by liberals.

  3. Barbara says:

    Get your head out of the sand, Darrell. It has blinded you and stopped your brain from thinking clearly. Wait until we are in full socialized medicine and they tell you that you can’t have a treatment even though it may mean your life. Let’s see how you feel then.

    • Darrel says:

      BARB: “Wait until we are in full socialized medicine>>

      DAR
      Who has “full socialized medicine” Barbara? Canada doesn’t. They pay premiums, they pay for their drugs, and dental and optical aren’t covered as with here, etc.,.

      And the Canadian system isn’t even being considered here.

      Why don’t you stop hyperventilating for a moment and thing clearly. People are already, under our greed based system, told they “can’t have a treatment.” Hell, they are told they can’t even BUY insurance because they have been sick before. See Blake.

      I know you like anecdotes so let me again share that I lived in Canada for 21 years under their system. I know hundreds of people in both countries. I know of not a SINGLE bad anecdotal story, first hand, from Canada. Not one.

      I know of lots from down here. Including my brother who went bankrupt when his wife’s health insurance company went bankrupt and they got stuck with the bill. She worked at the most successful restaurant in our city of 60k.

      Why don’t you read this story Barbara. It’ll take you two minutes.

      D.

  4. Big Dog says:

    Health care is too expensive because of government interference and tort laws.

    Cap lawsuits and doctors won’t have to pay millions for frivolous lawsuits. (from ambulance chasers like John Edwards)

    Stop the rules requiring so many things to be in a policy and allow peoplel to shop for plans offered in other states.

    Government rules have stymied the capitalist system. There is no competition for services and doctors have to run a billion tests in order to make money.

    Get the government out, have reasonable laws, and allow companies to actually compete. Prices will go down.

    As for party, you are again being illogical. You always change things, like the 97%, you guys must have practice sessions.

    There is a difference between being a Obama voter and being a Democrat. The poll identified Obama voters at 2:1. Now, McCain did not lose by a 2:1 margin and one has to figure that people who voted for Obama voted for the ideas he was presenting so it is natural they would support the idea of government health care.

    That is mush different than being Democrat or Republican.

    As for under 30 year olds. No surprise they have always trended Democrat because of the educational system. They also don’t vote in as high a numbers as those over 30. The largest growing part of the population are those in the retirement age categories.

    I read a couple of columns where real pollsters have said that the results should have been thrown out. Perhaps because the 2:1 Obama VOTERS (not Democrats)

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “Health care is too expensive because of government interference…”>>

      DAR
      That actually keeps costs down. And we need more of it. Ask Michael Bloomberg:

      ***
      A public insurance plan will help heal a broken health care system

      By Michael Bloomberg

      Thursday, July 2nd 2009

      The principles that President Obama has outlined for national health care reform are driven by a goal that I share: universal access to affordable health care. Last week, I went to Washington to speak with members of Congress about an idea that can help make that goal a reality: a public health insurance option.

      Today, most Americans get their health coverage from private insurers. A public health insurance option would create a competitor to private insurers that could potentially drive down costs across the board. I support the concept of a public plan, because if it’s done right, it means introducing exactly the kind of competition our system needs.

      The rest, NY Daily News.

      It’s a good article. And short. Perhaps read it and see what you think.

      Bigd: “…and tort laws.”

      DAR
      Another rightwing myth:

      “Including legal fees, insurance costs, and payouts, the cost of all US malpractice suits comes to less than one-half of 1 percent of health-care spending.”

      Slate (July 11, 2006) The Medical Malpractice Myth.

      Try again.

      Bigd: “…doctors have to run a billion tests in order to make money.”>>

      DAR
      Oh those poor doctors! They make about twice what Canadian doctors do, and those guys do just fine. We have about 18,000 people die a year (that’s six September 11’s) because of no health insurance, but your heart bleeds… for the doctors!

      Bigd: “allow companies to actually compete. Prices will go down.>>

      DAR
      The republican mantra for decades. All rubbish and no one believes it anymore. They can’t afford to.

      Bigd: “the poll identified Obama voters at 2:1.”

      DAR
      Your still trying to deny this scientific poll? First of all, show this. You never have. If you don’t like that poll, here is an indepth examination of six other polls dealing with the same question.

      Bigd: “As for under 30 year olds. No surprise they have always trended Democrat because of the educational system.”>>

      DAR
      No, you’re wrong again. Note:

      “In 1984, Reagan won 59% of the youth vote. Four years later, H.W. Bush won 52% of voters in this age group. It’s been downhill for the GOP ever since, and now only 25% of 17- to 29-year-old voters identify themselves as Republican.”

      LINK.

      D.

  5. Big Dog says:

    C’mon Darrel, why do you deliberately skew things. You can’t compare what Reagan did because he got Democrats of all ages. It was a landslide so that is a bad comparison.

    As for government, they do not keep costs down. Doctors order more tests under Medicare because the reimburse rates are too low. Some doctors refuse to accept it.

    Medicare costs more to run than private insurance. It is all that way.

    But I guess that reading about it and working it are two different things and those of you who rad about it know it all.

    • Darrel says:

      BIGD: You can’t compare what Reagan did because he got Democrats of all ages. It was a landslide so that is a bad comparison.>>

      DAR
      WTF? Why can’t I compare what Reagan and Papa Bush did? You made a claim about the historical record and that IS the historical record. You made a claim, I checked it, and your flat wrong. YOU SAID:

      “As for under 30 year olds. No surprise they have always trended Democrat because of the educational system.”

      That’s rubbish, as I showed. Reagan got 59% of the youth vote, Papa Bush got 52% (hardly a landslide that one!).

      Obama’s percentage?

      “Over all, 68 percent of voters ages 18 to 29 cast their ballots for the Democrat, versus 30 percent who supported John McCain. That is by far the greatest share of the youth vote that any presidential candidate has received since exit polls began reporting results by age categories, in 1976…” LINK

      Incidentally: “Since 1940, student voters have accurately picked all but two presidents…”. So there is something to the “youth vote” after all.

      BIGD: Medicare costs more to run than private insurance. It is all that way.>>

      DAR
      Again you show you haven’t the foggiest idea of what you are talking about. And this is supposed to be your area? It’s like me saying pianos have 24 keys! It’s unbelievable what your irrational devotion to ideology will make you say.

      BIGD: But I guess that reading about it and working it are two different things…”>>

      DAR
      But you are terribly biased and constantly make false claims. I consider your opinion but I also consider those who have much better first hand knowledge than you do.

      Oh, here comes one now:

      ***
      Rhonda Hackett, a Canadian expat clinical psychologist living in the US, has an editorial in the Denver Post with a good round-up of myths and truths about Canadian health care. I’ve lived under the Canadian, US, British and Costa Rican health care systems and of the four, I believe that the Canadian one functions best (I’d rank them Canadian, British, Costa Rican and US). My experience with all four includes routine and urgent care. I’ve had firsthand experience of pre-and post-natal care in Canada, the US and the UK; I’ve also seen the Canadian, US and UK palliative care system in action.

      On the other hand, I believe that the UK system of caring for elderly people is better than the others; Costa Ricans have better services for rural people; and the US has a better culture of retail service (outside of healthcare) than anywhere else I’ve lived.

      Myth: Taxes in Canada are extremely high, mostly because of national health care.
      In actuality, taxes are nearly equal on both sides of the border. Overall, Canada’s taxes are slightly higher than those in the U.S. However, Canadians are afforded many benefits for their tax dollars, even beyond health care (e.g., tax credits, family allowance, cheaper higher education), so the end result is a wash. At the end of the day, the average after-tax income of Canadian workers is equal to about 82 percent of their gross pay. In the U.S., that average is 81.9 percent.

      Myth: Canada’s health care system is a cumbersome bureaucracy.
      The U.S. has the most bureaucratic health care system in the world. More than 31 percent of every dollar spent on health care in the U.S. goes to paperwork, overhead, CEO salaries, profits, etc. The provincial single-payer system in Canada operates with just a 1 percent overhead. Think about it. It is not necessary to spend a huge amount of money to decide who gets care and who doesn’t when everybody is covered.”

      LINK

      DAR
      Bigd, you really ought to get yourself informed about this issue and stop saying such silly things!

      D.

  6. Big Dog says:

    And Michael Bloomberg?

    What does he even know? He is a moron. A self centered elitist.

  7. Big Dog says:

    Medicare has hidden costs that are not considered in the reports. All the money that is spent on Congress and staffers who work on regulations, all the administrative fees that are absorbed by the government. I have shown you at least two reports that show this to be the case.

    Medicare is poorly run or it would not be going bankrupt.

    • Darrel says:

      BIGD: Medicare has hidden costs that are not considered in the reports.>>

      DAR
      Show this. Show, from a mainstream not rightwing insane source that medicare has anywhere near half the overhead of the private costs. You can’t do it.

      BIGD: All the money that is spent on Congress and staffers…”>>

      DAR
      That’s just ridiculous. It’s a system set up decades ago that gets tweaked once in a while. The idea that this eats anything like the HUNDREDS of BILLIONS sucked out of the system by the private greed based system is too absurd for comment.

      BIGD: I have shown you at least two reports that show this to be the case.>>

      DAR
      Really? Let’s see it. Show something from a mainstream, non-crazy source that shows medicare having anything near half the costs. You can’t do it because it’s false.

      BIGD: Medicare is poorly run or it would not be going bankrupt.>>

      DAR
      Medicare will need more money because of more old people and exploding costs in the for profit greed sector. This will be easy to solve. Tax the rich. Bigtime. If that’s not enough, tax them again.

      Or, we could try and control costs like other countries do?

      Note this again:

      “The U.S. has the most bureaucratic health care system in the world. More than 31 percent of every dollar spent on health care in the U.S. goes to paperwork, overhead, CEO salaries, profits, etc. The provincial single-payer system in Canada operates with just a 1 percent overhead. Think about it. It is not necessary to spend a huge amount of money to decide who gets care and who doesn’t when everybody is covered.”

      Because of the incredible efficiency of Canada’s system, even though they pay the same in taxes, they are able to cover everyone’s healthcare, and practically for free (the premiums and extra charges are laughably small). And in contrast to Americans, (85% of whom think their system needs to be overhauled or scrapped) they love it. Gallup asked.

      And this just in, now the eighth poll I’ve given you:

      “Poll: 73% of Voters Think Health Care Reform Must Include Choice of a Public Health Insurance Plan”

      “…a new poll by Lake Research found that a whopping 73% of voters want everyone to have a choice of private health insurance or a public health insurance plan while only 15% want everyone to have private insurance.”

      LINK

      • Big Dog says:

        I have shown you time and again. You refuse to see that comparing medicare to private insurance is an apples to oranges comparison but that when the numbers are looked at with a like comparison then Medicare is not run well. The government has never run anything efficiently.

        Here is another study using the CBO’s numbers. Pay attention to things like private insurance has an administrative cost in regard to collecting premiums. Medicare does not report its cost for collecting its money because the IRS does it for them. It costs a lot to do it but they do not report it because it is another government agency. There are quite a few government agencies involved this way. These are the hidden costs. The studies are out there. Just because you do not like the source does not mean the information is incorrect.

        Saying that it does not count is like saying that my snowball stand has low overhead because the neighbor gives me the ice. It still costs someone.

        In the case of Medicare, it all costs the taxpayer and the costs are hidden. When they are all totaled we can see how Medicare has higher costs. It is quite simple.

        When a private company hides costs it is called cooking the books and people go to jail for it. When the government does it it is called cost savings…

  8. Darrel says:

    Saw this quote about healthcare and thought of Blake:

    “…When you drill down to the essence of what the free market conservatives are saying, it’s that people who don’t have the money to pay for good insurance deserve to die. It’s really just an outgrowth of their belief in social Darwinism and Randian exceptionalism — good people have money, bad people are parasites — and those who can’t afford to keep up are lacking in moral fiber and work ethic. It’s how they see the world — until they too are caught in the web, at which point they blame women and minorities.”
    Link

  9. Big Dog says:

    I have linked to several studies Darrel. Because they do not say what you want them to say you discount them as right wing.

    Yet, I am supposed to accept you assertions about health care from any source at all.

  10. Big Dog says:

    Really Darrel? Because it says:

    it’s that people who don’t have the money to pay for good insurance deserve to die.

    Blake has the money to pay for insurance. He can’t get it because he had cancer. However, he can afford to pay for his own health care.

    You are wrong.

    • Darrel says:

      BIGD: Blake has the money to pay for insurance.>>

      DAR
      Then he should and stop freeloading.

      BIGD: He can’t get it because he had cancer.>>

      DAR
      I don’t believe that. You can shop around and get coverage with riders.

      Bigd: “he can afford to pay for his own health care.”

      DAR
      I doubt it. Not if something big happens. Either way, if he racks up a bill he can’t pay, he knows others will step and pay for it. He knows our socialist net will catch him.

      Are you saying the following is not true? And if so, upon what basis?

      “The Added Cost of Care for the Uninsured. The remaining sum (almost $43 billion in 2005) is primarily paid by two sources: Roughly one-third is covered by a number of government programs, but two-thirds is paid by people with health insurance through higher premiums.”

      LINK

      D.

  11. Blake says:

    Can someone, for the love of God, fix Henry Waxman’s face?

  12. Big Dog says:

    Your source is dedicated to getting health care for all. Imagine that.

    All insurance carries extra money for the risks of those not insured. In auto insurance it is called uninsured motorist protection.

    There are a number of reasons for the high costs. I have spelled them out but you fail to see. You have your mind made up, good for you, but it does not make you correct.

  13. Big Dog says:

    As you know, there are many reasons that contribute to death and access to health care and just as importantly a willingness to seek medical care (and follow advice) is just one of many things.

    America has about 20 million illegals many of whom are in poor health. They die younger and add to the number. America has more obese people than Canada and Canada has more daily smokers. These things are items that all the access in the world will not correct.

    People have to want to lose weight or quit smoking.

    The difference of ~2 years is not a big one.