Abortion bills force both parties to ...

Abortion bills force both parties to rethink political calculus

There are 1168 comments on the The Washington Post story from Jul 6, 2013, titled Abortion bills force both parties to rethink political calculus. In it, The Washington Post reports that:

People gather outside the state legislature as Senate Republicans gave their final approval to legislation requiring additional rules surrounding abortions in North Carolina, even as hundreds of protesters against the bill watched from the gallery in Raleigh, N.C., Wednesday,July 3. As a member of the Wisconsin State Assembly years ago, Republican ... (more)

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Washington Post.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Level 1

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#540 Oct 17, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
The big question is 'where's the money going to come from'?
Now, insurance companies allow one to manage risk. If one makes an open declaration that it's a "right", then everyone gets to see a doctor for everything they want to see a doctor for, but someone has to A.) manage it and B.) pay for it. Both A and B are expensive propositions.
Managing risk? Is that a right?

Cuz, you know, it's a right you want to take away from pregnant women....just saying.
liberal waiting on check

Olive Branch, MS

#541 Oct 17, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>Somebody should tell the liberals that killing 23 million female babies is the ultimate war on women, not just some strawman over pills.
a woman should have a right to choose, its her body, republicans and pro lifers are perverbs. none of their business what goes on inside a woman's vagina or uterus.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Level 1

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#542 Oct 17, 2013
"Where's the money going to come from???" you ask?
People will still spend money on their health care - but cost containment will lower their medical bills, prevention of illness will become the root of their physician's recommendations,(rather than pushing for expensive 'treatment' after the fact), one's financial well-being won't be trashed by the cost of treating catastrophic health conditions, and the patient will be more involved in the entire process, than a bean counter for their insurance company is at present.

JMO
Dan

Omaha, NE

#543 Oct 17, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Managing risk? Is that a right?
Cuz, you know, it's a right you want to take away from pregnant women....just saying.
No, there's no right to manage risk. You do it or you don't.
Insurance policies are ways to manage risk. The insurer assumes a portion of the potential loss one would incur. Insurers don't pay claims after the loss if you aren't insured prior to the loss.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#544 Oct 17, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
"Where's the money going to come from???" you ask?
People will still spend money on their health care - but cost containment will lower their medical bills, prevention of illness will become the root of their physician's recommendations,(rather than pushing for expensive 'treatment' after the fact), one's financial well-being won't be trashed by the cost of treating catastrophic health conditions, and the patient will be more involved in the entire process, than a bean counter for their insurance company is at present.
JMO
Yes, I'm asking where the money will come from.

How will the costs be "contained"? Medical care still costs money.

Insurance was the mechanism by which people would mitigate risk of financial hardship from medical care expenses. Who would pay for medical care if insurance was removed from the equation?
Ink

Levittown, PA

#545 Oct 17, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>If you think the government doesn't already know everything it wants to about you, you've been hiding in a closet, underground, since early 1944.
How's the weather down there?
Roll over and play dead. You are about to be dragged out by your heels.
Ink

Levittown, PA

#546 Oct 17, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
"Where's the money going to come from???" you ask?
People will still spend money on their health care - but cost containment will lower their medical bills, prevention of illness will become the root of their physician's recommendations,(rather than pushing for expensive 'treatment' after the fact), one's financial well-being won't be trashed by the cost of treating catastrophic health conditions, and the patient will be more involved in the entire process, than a bean counter for their insurance company is at present.
JMO
How are you going to contain costs and still have doctors.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Level 1

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#547 Oct 17, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
No, there's no right to manage risk. You do it or you don't.
Insurance policies are ways to manage risk. The insurer assumes a portion of the potential loss one would incur. Insurers don't pay claims after the loss if you aren't insured prior to the loss.
Then there is no 'right' for insurance companies to exist...or to cover health care expenses.

Rights are not negated by failing to exercise them.

Personal risk assessment is a right, AND a responsibility.

Abortion is one way to manage the risks of pregnancy.

Try again?

“Truly Pro-Life”

Level 1

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#548 Oct 17, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
How are you going to contain costs and still have doctors.
Would you rather have a doctor who's 'in it for the money' or one who's 'in it to help people'?

As long as illness is more profitable than wellness, doctors will be led by an interest in making skads of money, rather than providing people with, and educating us in, prevention strategies...

guided by an interest in recommending the most expensive treatment, rather than the most efficacious one...

motivated by interests in providing the most profitable, rather than the most suitable, treatments and procedures to patients...

and make a greater investment in maximizing the number of return visits, than in containing costs to maximize availability.

Changing the cost structure of medicine,(which right now is still skewed toward whatever the latest lobby has achieved in Congress, and reliant on what insurance considers 'necessary treatment') will lower medical costs, and provide doctors with an incentive to help KEEP people well, rather than incentives to exhaust our resources in attempts to 'make' us well.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Level 1

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#549 Oct 17, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Roll over and play dead. You are about to be dragged out by your heels.
You wish.

Next...
Ink

Levittown, PA

#550 Oct 17, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Would you rather have a doctor who's 'in it for the money' or one who's 'in it to help people'?
As long as illness is more profitable than wellness, doctors will be led by an interest in making skads of money, rather than providing people with, and educating us in, prevention strategies...
guided by an interest in recommending the most expensive treatment, rather than the most efficacious one...
motivated by interests in providing the most profitable, rather than the most suitable, treatments and procedures to patients...
and make a greater investment in maximizing the number of return visits, than in containing costs to maximize availability.
Changing the cost structure of medicine,(which right now is still skewed toward whatever the latest lobby has achieved in Congress, and reliant on what insurance considers 'necessary treatment') will lower medical costs, and provide doctors with an incentive to help KEEP people well, rather than incentives to exhaust our resources in attempts to 'make' us well.
If they don't make money they won't be in it at all.

“Blessed Be”

Level 1

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#551 Oct 17, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I'm asking where the money will come from.
How will the costs be "contained"? Medical care still costs money.
Insurance was the mechanism by which people would mitigate risk of financial hardship from medical care expenses. Who would pay for medical care if insurance was removed from the equation?
Those on self-pay are charged less, generally, especially for office visits. Not only that, but do you realize that those with insurance are already footing the bill for those who have none, in addition to the hospital taking a loss (just as though they'd simply charged less in the first place)?

Do you really think, in our society, that doctors would be able to charge what they do if they couldn't count on insurance companies for making up the difference in what the patient can and can't pay? The simple answer is, they'd have to bring their prices down.

Here's an example. I once worked with a Chiropractor. His office accepted most insurance. But, he and his wife (who did the billing) thought the paperwork was a pain. So, they started telling their patients, the insurance will charge you this co-pay for an adjustment, but if you pay in cash, I'll charge $____ less than that. He made the money for his services without money from the insurance company OR the gov't.

As it is now, doctors get to charge exhorbitant amounts, knowing that the insurance will cover most of that, and this enables them to buy a Porshe, or whatever. And medical insurance was not really meant for anything other than catastrophes.
Ink

Levittown, PA

#552 Oct 17, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>You wish.
Next...
Ben Carson speaking;

“You know, all these things are just straight out of the text,” said Carson.“What's interesting is, you know, Vladimir Lenin, one of the founders of socialism and communism. He said socialized medicine is the keystone of the arch to the socialist state. In other words, you've got to get the socialized medicine as the foundation because it gives you control of the people.”

“Once you have control of them you can do what you want,” said Carson.

When Lenin and the Bolsheviks took over Russia in 1917-18, health care became a government-run operation. Today, despite the collapse of communism in Russia in 1991, the life expectancy for Russian males is 63 years and females, 75 years, according to the World Health Organization. In the United States, average life expectancy for males is 76 years, and females, 81 years.
- See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/james-beattie...
CZars_R_Us

Orlando, FL

#553 Oct 17, 2013
I all for it. One less future liberal. Now the economy and the debt are important topics.
Ink

Levittown, PA

#554 Oct 17, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Those on self-pay are charged less, generally, especially for office visits. Not only that, but do you realize that those with insurance are already footing the bill for those who have none, in addition to the hospital taking a loss (just as though they'd simply charged less in the first place)?
Do you really think, in our society, that doctors would be able to charge what they do if they couldn't count on insurance companies for making up the difference in what the patient can and can't pay? The simple answer is, they'd have to bring their prices down.
Here's an example. I once worked with a Chiropractor. His office accepted most insurance. But, he and his wife (who did the billing) thought the paperwork was a pain. So, they started telling their patients, the insurance will charge you this co-pay for an adjustment, but if you pay in cash, I'll charge $____ less than that. He made the money for his services without money from the insurance company OR the gov't.
As it is now, doctors get to charge exhorbitant amounts, knowing that the insurance will cover most of that, and this enables them to buy a Porshe, or whatever. And medical insurance was not really meant for anything other than catastrophes.
How are you going to self pay for a hip replacement?

“Truly Pro-Life”

Level 1

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#555 Oct 17, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
If they don't make money they won't be in it at all.
Why do we still have teachers?


Or housewives, for that matter...
Smell the Coffee

Twinsburg, OH

#556 Oct 17, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
How are you going to self pay for a hip replacement?
Depends on your deductible. You pay a percentage of the cost after you've reached your deductible. You pick the insurance with the higher or lower deductible, which determines your percentage of the cost.
Ink

Levittown, PA

#557 Oct 17, 2013
Smell the Coffee wrote:
<quoted text>Depends on your deductible. You pay a percentage of the cost after you've reached your deductible. You pick the insurance with the higher or lower deductible, which determines your percentage of the cost.
She said self pay. No insurance.

“Blessed Be”

Level 1

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#558 Oct 17, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
How are you going to self pay for a hip replacement?
Clearly, you understood none of what I posted.
incredulous

Carmel, IN

#559 Oct 17, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
Well, this thread came back to life in a big way, din'it??
Spirited debate...what a refreshing change from the previous feces-hurling troll fest...
We need a single-payer system, which would change the cost structure of medical care, and remove the insurance companies from the equation.
As the leader of the charge to promote human rights everywhere, shouldn't we be acting on the idea that health care is a right, rather than a privilege?
Jesus certainly gave every indication that he thought so....
For-profit health care is an oxymoron at best, and an insidious evil at worst.
JMO
There are plenty of socialist commie countries in this world....why destroy the land of opportunity?

How about this? Why don't you work for free and let's see how long you'll do that. EVERYONE has a right to be paid for their work, regardless of vocation. Why don't we demand that everyone associated with the food industry work for free......the housing industry......the clothing industry?

If you want to guarantee shitty healthcare.........socialize it. Thanks oscumma.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Immigration Reform Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Republicans downplay Trump rally unrest in Cali... 4 min spud 265
News Arrests in Seattle as May Day marchers take to ... 11 min spud 16
News Voters have trust issues with Hillary Clinton? ... (Jul '15) 16 min positronium 5,396
News Waving the wrong flag only makes Trump stronger 26 min o see the light 14
News "I have never seen negatives that high," says a... 40 min Go Blue Forever 65
Rose's Pub (Mar '10) 45 min anne bonny 140,899
News Trump Brings Fiery Message To Thousands in Hart... 1 hr Teri 17
More from around the web