Health :slashingtongue

No time for environment or immigration but….

Thursday, December 24th, 2009 at 10:12 am  
Leave your comment

They always say “We have got to put off illegal immigration as we have got to take care of the issue of health-care first.” “ The economy is the most important and we should discuss the ACES bill at a later time.” But do you know what kind of bill is now the hot topic in Congress…?

Un-freaking-believable! We are wasting time in the Congress talking about making TV ads lower in volume. Yes I am that serious. A Californian Representative, Representative Anna Eshoo, thinks it is too annoying, and something needs to be done about it. Guess this is Representative Eshoo’s idea of Christmas gift!

What the hell (I wanted to use another four letter word)! What are we going to talk about next? Regulating the army against the oompa-loompa invasion in the future? Must we regulate bicycles just in case ET needs to use one of them to fly?

On the topic of annoyance, can we regulate about babies crying on planes? Can we please stop having movies with blue people; where is the creativity man; Smurfs, X-men, Avatar? Can we ban the swinging gate maneuver that the Redskins played against the Giants?

This is utterly ridiculous! Seriously, worried about ads? Is this of the utmost emergency? Can we knock some Governor Jesse Ventura sense into Congress. We cannot get any health care work done, but we can spend hours about this bull crap! Are we electing idiots?

Whenever a bill comes about; these politicians whine about not given enough time to read bills in time to vote when we do the same thing and comment about it, we should remind them about this rubbish!

The healthcare debate should have been over months ago. It should have been wrapped up in three months. We should have solved the issues concerning illegal immigration, the ACES bill and an education reform bill by now.

But no! Rather than having the efficiency of the military, we are having theatrics of a soap opera instead. It is fun to watch, but very painful to realize that this is the body that is running our country! Why, why is this happening only in our America? I think the answer to that question would be the savior of our future generations.

The political threat to our country is very real. It seems to be heading to a political implosion. On the one hand there are the Republicans who is being taken over by the nutty right wing led by crazy woman from Alaska, and the Democrats that are so pathetic and politically dumb led by weakness and chief, President Obama.

Enough is enough! We have get down and get issues straight and start solving them. Please knock some sense into your member of Congress!

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Republican plan to cover just 3 million

Thursday, November 5th, 2009 at 5:55 pm  
Leave your comment

The Republican have long criticized and hit away the Democratic plans on many issues. Health care though, have been especially forceful. So, when they when they give out the bill, guess what, they forgot the most essential part of it : Health insurance coverage.

My goodness! I really could not believe it! There are 47 million people not insured in the United States of America. Take away the illegal immigrants and you get 38 million people uninsured. Of this, there are 17 million middle class Americans who are denied insurance or cannot afford it.

At it barest minimum, steps should be taken to ensure that these 17 million people get ensured. But guess how many people the Republican plans cover. In their own words, 750 000 households. In terms of population 3 million people. Yes 3 million people.

Is that what we really call reform? Is this what America has come down to? Where an ideology drives something so much that we are only bothered to cover 3 million people when we need to be covering 17-47 million? Come on!What in the world are they doing?

I have yet to receive the scoring of both plans by the CBO officially, so this is my first impression of the outline that I see. The Democrats claim that their $1 trillion is going to decrease the debt just like the Republicans. From what I scheme through, there are going to be lots of taxes for the top 1% and surtaxes here and there. Their plan includes the public option. It also cuts Medicare by half a trillion over 10 years.

Here are the things I would be looking out for in the Democrat bills. Firstly, what taxes are they going to raise? Are they going to raise corporate taxes which I vehemently oppose, or personal taxes of the top 1%, which I think would be okay? Furthermore, is this just a stop gap measure or are going to control cost over the long term? Can we bring the increases of health insurance cost to down to the rate of inflation? In Medicare, are we cutting it sufficiently; we waste $500billion to $800billion a year on health care; how much of that is Medicare and how much of that is being taken out?

In the Republican bills, there are notably no tax increases. So that should set the record straight for some people. But what stuns me is that it does not include the ceasing of preexisting conditions. How can people be covered if insurance companies still can say that they do not want to cover you? Also, the coverage of 3 million million people is just atrocious! It is short of 18% of the bare minimum and not slightly over 6% of the maximum.

Other than that, the questions that I would be asking is how do they intend to pay for it if they are not cutting cost or raising taxes? What are they missing in their 200 page bill? Bills are usually in the 1000 page region. What are they going to do about the 10 million people (part of the 47 million uninsured) that have the ability to buy insurance but refuse to do so? Let them be and still let the remaining taxpayer payers for their bills?

I would put up my analysis of the bills soon. From what I get, my report on both bills is not a good one., particularly for the Republicans.

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta

ST against both Mainers voting decisions; but respects it

Wednesday, November 4th, 2009 at 6:02 pm  
Leave your comment

I have always said, that amongst all the states; it is I find Mainers most Independent and they make the most sense when voting. However, in this case I think that they got it wrong both ways, but we should not challenge their view by votes.

Maine voted 53%-47% in favor of repealing gay marriages. I am a person that has a different view than most out there. I follow the stance of Governor Jesse Ventura and I think that ALL marriage should be repealed and replaced with civil unions.

Marriage is not a state affair, it is a cultural, religious, customary and/or traditional affair. I believe that the government should not force a Church, Synagogue, Mosque or other places of worship to accept gay marriages when it is forbidden by their religion to do so.

At the same time, these places of worship should not dictate to us our policy. I believe that we should not disrespect them, but we should not be shaping our laws to their beliefs. I believe that a civil union is the union of two consenting adults (above 21). This should grant people the same rights as what marriage grants today.

For people that say that this could lead to bestiality or pedophilia; I would like to stress the words CONSENTING ADULTS. Animals and children are not consenting adults, they do not have a mind mature enough to know what is right and what is wrong. As for issues of bisexuality and polygamy, these people would need a will to do matters anyway rather than a simple matter of marriage. And doesn’t our nation allow polygamy for Mormons and Muslims? Why can’t they allow gay marriage for other religion that allow it?

Mainers also voted 59%-41% in favor of expanding medical marijuana usage. I am on the right when it comes to marijuana. Look, I do not doubt or condone the effects of marijuana. What I do know, is that it is a controlled substance that can heal people. The question is not whether we are going to legalize marijuana but whether we are expanding medical marijuana.

To me , the key word here is medical. I think that if a person is sick, and the doctor has to administer marijuana as medicine, let the doctor do what he has to do. Hell, if heroin can cure something, use it! The doctor should be answerable to any side effects including addiction. I also do not want it to end up like prescription drugs, where people can buy it over the counter to get high. I believe that doctors or other health care professionals should administer marijuana instead.

I find it ridiculous that one can get marijuana for a headache. Marijuana should be treated for pain that arouses from cancer or cancer treatment. Dispensaries are not a good idea. If it cannot stop underage drinking and smoking, what in the world would make the free market stop selling marijuana to minors? To me, that would cause us a lot of problems in the future.

Now, this is what I love about Mainers, they are to the left on medical marijuana but on the right on gay marriage. I am just the opposite. But unlike talking to a Texan Conservative or a Californian Liberal, their heads would not explode if you disagree with them.

Lastly, I think that the vote should be respected, even though a person like me disagrees with it. This is America. We are the fathers of modern Democracy. Never should a person’s view go against the will of many. The only alternative a person have is to take it to the courts. Courts are bound by their interpretation of the law, not to the citizens. If they throw it out, that should be the end of the matter.

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta

Pot consumption not illegal now

Tuesday, October 20th, 2009 at 8:07 am  
Leave your comment

The Justice Department has said that patients of medical marijuana are not to be targeted for prosecution. They would be targeting drug traffickers instead. I think that this should be the best compromise for those who are in favor of medical marijuana legalization with those who are against it.

Attorney General Eric Holder has also said that the decision to go after marijuana consumers would be left to the States. So while medical marijuana advocates can forget about smoking pot in Texas, they can legally do so in California.

The medical marijuana pharmacies should be too happy in California, though. The law over there clearly states that the medical marijuana pharmacies should only be able to operate if it is not for profit. Good luck on that!

My stance on medical marijuana is very simple, keep it medical. I also have the same for prescription drugs. I do not think that drugs like these should be bought in stores. They should only be bought with doctor’s consent and taken in the doctor’s or nurse’s presence. Should they get addicted to it, we go after the doctors, just like we would do with if patients are addicted to other drugs in similar situations.

The reason for this is that we should not make the same mistake with marijuana that we have made with cigarettes and alcohol. We must not be paying for the abuse of the substances by other people like we are with alcohols and drugs. Hence, we should make sure that there be no addiction and there must be proper administration of marijuana

The science of marijuana is real. We all know that it can help reduce pain. We know that it is not as addictive as other drugs and that it is less harmful than alcohol to our health. I also think that if doctors say that it can be a drug why are we arguing against them? Aren’t they the subject matters in their own field? Would we argue against an engineer about the structure of our buildings or the amount of current in our I-pods? Why is it that the only subject matter experts that we are against are the Generals and the doctors?

However, like other intoxicants, if abused there would be self inflicted consequences. It is the same for cigarettes and in fatty food. Therefore, I think that to prevent marijuana from being abused, the doctor should be present. We know how to deal with fatty foods and cigarettes, but most of us would not know how to deal with marijuana addiction. We never have had it before.

Also, with marijuana being so easy to grow, I hope that this does not lead to deforestation or us being complacent about it. I hope that there does not come a day where we would take marijuana for a headache rather than Paracetamol.

Lastly, I think that the people who push for the legalization of pot should not complain any further. They can go after the States, but how much more do they want the government to bend to their will? What more do they want?

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta

Public option compromise

Wednesday, October 14th, 2009 at 7:59 am  
Leave your comment

A new version of the “public option” has been released. Now, it is going to allow states to decide whether they want the public option or other wise. This has been backed by Governor Howard Dean, the ex-Governor of Vermont.

I have always been jittery when it comes to the clause of the public option in the health care reform bill. I think it is way too close to single payer universal health-care. Though I am not against single-payer universal health-care, I think that we should try all other alternatives first.

However, both parties did not even make an inkling of a suggestion to increase the competition other than the public option. That was all that they could come up with. Hence, when the public option was removed from the bill, I decided to oppose the bill and think that we should kill it.

Right now, there is a compromise being chiseled out by Senators Chuck Schumer and Tom Carper. It is a very simple thing, if you really feel that your state does not want “government in health-care”; your state can opt-out and let other states that want it keep it. It is incredibly straight forward.

That being said, I think that there should be an additional condition to this option. Right now, if you go to the emergency room and you cannot pay for your operation as you do not have health insurance, it would be the Federal Government that has to foot the bill. They cannot just let you die.

Lets assume that this clause is passed, and some states passed public option and some other states did not. If you were a citizen of a State that does not have the public option, you do not have health insurance and you need to go the emergency room, there is a higher chance that the Federal government has to step in. Why should the I, via my federal taxes, be paying for another State’s irresponsibility?

Therefore, should this compromise of the health-care bill be passed, I think that the cost of uninsured health care should be passed on to the States. In that way, whether they have the public option or not, they pay for it. The federal government should lower taxes and the states would increase the taxes. Overall, it should not effect us financially.

I think that the continued opposition to this really underlines how much potential the public option has to be successful. The Republicans fear that this would over time force their states to also adopt the public option. Do you really think that all the 60% of the people in the poll that support the public option are liberals?

When California has the public option and people start to receive health-care as a result of it, don’t you think Arizonans would demand that their state have it too? They know that it would lead to the public option coming up in all the states. In fact, people like me think that it could even lead to a single payer system in the future.

An additional benefit to that is that the State would also be interested in preventive measures so that they can save money. They would rather invest in fitness regimes for children rather than paying their bills when they are older. It is much easier to execute this at a state or local even level rather than the federal government being involved in it.

However, as of now, there is no movement of this new public option plan. Until it has passed the committee votes, I would not be calling for support to kill this bill!

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta