Azazello1313 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 (edited) Because Wyden/Bennett aren't smart enough to call their common-sense option "The Health Care Bill Obama Thought Up All by Hisself" well, more importantly, the way wyden-bennett pays for itself (and one of the main ways it exerts downward pressure on costs overall) is by making health benefits taxable and portable, thus weakening the employer/healthcare link. everybody knows this is the best way to do it....only problem for obama is he attacked that aspect of mccain's health care plan hard during the election. he will be owned by his own soundbytes if he takes the sensible path. and obama, like almost any politician, would rather make himself look good than do what's best for the country. Edited September 10, 2009 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I'd like to hear you back up #2 being a red herring entirely. Do you have any idea what an OB/GYN pays in malpractice insurance? How many additional tests do doctors run just to cover their ass? Cap medical malpractice to actual damages, forget punitive damages. If a doctor deserves punitive damages, they deserve to lose their license and to face criminal proceedings. you have know idea what you are talking about here. stop before the other foot is in your mouth. What is "actual" damages and how do you calculate them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 you have know idea what you are talking about here. stop before the other foot is in your mouth. What is "actual" damages and how do you calculate them? actual damages would be the cost any future procedures, required equipment, and medications resulting from the malpractice actual damages would also include compensation for lost time from work, but it would be reasonable compensation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I'm advocating doing away with punitive damages Wait, wait. Completely doing away with punitive damages or placing a cap on them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 actual damages would be the cost any future procedures, required equipment, and medications resulting from the malpracticeactual damages would also include compensation for lost time from work, but it would be reasonable compensation. So if I can't walk for the rest of my life, what's the actual compensation for that? The cost of a rubber leg and a couple weeks off work? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 So if I can't walk for the rest of my life, what's the actual compensation for that? The cost of a rubber leg and a couple weeks off work? "actual", or compensatory, damages also include pain and suffering, loss of consortium, loss of reputation, etc. luckily for you, they also incluse loss of mental capacity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 and make a wellness test mandatory every year. if you take care of yourself, you get a higher score thus better rates. if you want to eat like crap and not exercise, than u pay a higher rate. like every other insurance out there, rate the person and charge accordingly. This is a very good idea for all insurance companies to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 please ask yourself why such sensible-yet-ambitious plans are pushed aside in favor of public option, just-tax-the-rich fairy tales. edit to add: I meant to link this wsj article specifically about wyden-bennett rather than the one above. but the one above is good too, so I'll leave it in there. That was a GREAT article, and an example of what this bill SHOULD have been. Both sides giving a little so that end goal of really reforming health care is achieved. Nice pull Az . . I wish this WAS the proposal being debated. Two quotes I really liked from that article. . . The problem of spiraling costs is on display in Massachusetts, where a universal coverage plan started under former Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican Mr. Wyden has been meeting with the president on the issue, so is Mr. Obama committed to the public option, I wonder? Mr. Wyden won't tell, but directs me instead to review Mr. Obama's book, "The Audacity of Hope." In it, he says, "he talked about a system like what we're talking about in the Healthy Americans Act." Obama wrote about a program just like what these guys are supporting. Unfortunately the rest of the Dems have gotten in the way and splintered what the plan should have been. Just another reason why the Dems cant ever get substantial change accomplished. They splinter and fight each other between the middle road moderates and the far left nutjobs. Say what you will about the Repubs, but they fall in lockstep with whatever their party tends to present and they provide a unified front against the opposition party. Hell of a political machine . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Just another reason why the Dems cant ever get substantial change accomplished. They splinter and fight each other between the middle road moderates and the far left nutjobs. Say what you will about the Repubs, but they fall in lockstep with whatever their party tends to present and they provide a unified front against the opposition party. Hell of a political machine . . . . True dat. Shame everything they lockstep along with is drivel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 So if I can't walk for the rest of my life, what's the actual compensation for that? The cost of a rubber leg and a couple weeks off work? How old are you? What was your profession, and does that profession depend on you having two legs? If you are permanently disabled I'd say that you would be due your current annual salary plus a cost of living adjustment (based on historical averages) until you are 65. I don't think you should receive a huge judgment for 10 times what you would make in your lifetime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 actual damages would be the cost any future procedures, required equipment, and medications resulting from the malpracticeactual damages would also include compensation for lost time from work, but it would be reasonable compensation. How old are you? What was your profession, and does that profession depend on you having two legs? If you are permanently disabled I'd say that you would be due your current annual salary plus a cost of living adjustment (based on historical averages) until you are 65. I don't think you should receive a huge judgment for 10 times what you would make in your lifetime. "actual", or compensatory, damages also include pain and suffering, loss of consortium, loss of reputation, etc. luckily for you, they also incluse loss of mental capacity. Hey Perch, Az says it also covers pain and suffering, loss of consortium, loss of reputation and "etc." You two get on the same page, and I'll debate it at the same time. Or you two argue with each other. I don't care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Hey Perch, Az says it also covers pain and suffering, loss of consortium, loss of reputation and "etc." You two get on the same page, and I'll debate it at the same time. Or you two argue with each other. I don't care. nice dodge, moran. if perch says actual damages don't include those things, he's wrong too. what actual damages DON'T include are punitive damages -- damages which, by definition, are completely disconnected from any loss by the claimant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I think it is hilarious that you guys are debating over the value of a rubber leg . . . . and that the scary spectre of medical malpractice is the evil demon that is rasing premiums by double digits almost every year . . . .: Az and Perch both need to read Chavez's link , . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 nice dodge, moran. if perch says actual damages don't include those things, he's wrong too. what actual damages DON'T include are punitive damages -- damages which, by definition, are completely disconnected from any loss by the claimant. It's a dodge when I reply to exactly what he posted with a clarifying question? Then you came in and corrected him and called me wrong for it? You're complicated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I think it is hilarious that you guys are debating over the value of a rubber leg . . . . and that the scary spectre of medical malpractice is the evil demon that is rasing premiums by double digits almost every year . . . .: Az and Perch both need to read Chavez's link , . . nah, I agree and I've said before that the malpractice stuff is a relatively small piece of the overall puzzle. I mean, I DO think it's a smart thing to address, and that statutory guidelines making tort awards more reasonable and predictable is a good idea. but it's not some panacea that will fix health care costs. I was simply correcting atomic's idiotic statement that actual damages for a guy that lost his leg is the cost of a rubber leg and a couple weeks' pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 It's a dodge when I reply to exactly what he posted with a clarifying question?Then you came in and corrected him and called me wrong for it? You're complicated. if perch thinks actual damages are the cost of a rubber leg and a couple weeks' pay, he's as stupidly wrong as you are. there, does that make you feel better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 if perch thinks actual damages are the cost of a rubber leg and a couple weeks' pay, he's as stupidly wrong as you are. there, does that make you feel better? I don't think that. I think that's what Perch thought which is why I asked him. Have you ever had a conversation before? Try watching for a while before jumping in. You'll get the hang of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 How old are you? What was your profession, and does that profession depend on you having two legs? If you are permanently disabled I'd say that you would be due your current annual salary plus a cost of living adjustment (based on historical averages) until you are 65. I don't think you should receive a huge judgment for 10 times what you would make in your lifetime. how about a baby?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 : Az and Perch both need to read Chavez's link , . . they cant read Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evil_gop_liars Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 how about a baby?? Baby are only important when they are cells, once out of the womb they are illegal aliens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 I don't think that. I think that's what Perch thought which is why I asked him. Have you ever had a conversation before? Try watching for a while before jumping in. You'll get the hang of it. you asked a stupid question and I answered the question, while pointing out that it was stupid. damn, I thought that's how conversations with you were supposed to work. back to the drawing board, I guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 (edited) you asked a question to someone else and I jumped in the middle with a false assumption, and called you stupid. Yeah, I know. Edited September 12, 2009 by AtomicCEO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Good to see we are staying on track here . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.