Hi
The much awaited speech re health care came and went and I don't know any more about it than I did before the speech. The "glib" president didn't come across with any new explanations of his agenda, same old trite proposals. The American public has rejected these proposals but the democrats still are trying to push them off on us. I just wish that the republicans will hold and get enough blue dog democrats in the senate to defeat this terrible bill.
The one thing that amuses me is the so called cooperative insurance carriers. In my writing I have said that a MUTUAL type of insurance carrier would tend to lower costs. The big difference between my idea and that which is floated about in congress is that under my plan the mutual company would compete in the market place, not be over regulated by the government. Government regulation only serves to cause inefficiency and waste. (Amtrak, Post Office, Medicare and Medicaid, (remember Obama is saying there is enough waste to pay for the covering of the uninsured), and the congressional cafeterias, etc. The list of government management failures should serve as a caution for any federal takeover. Ann Coulter pointed out last night on a talk show that Bernie Maddoff and his Ponzi scheme was under federal over sight. Look at what that got us. Do we need more of the same? I hope not
Stay tuned as I will write about Obama and his dealings with some shady organizations. Interesting.
Pray for the soldiers.
GOD Bless
Friday, September 11, 2009
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
health care
Hi
In the last blog I forwarded some ideas for health care reform. I also deferred the reforms concerning those who are uninsured,not I will address that part of the problem.
There have been several numbers tossed around and I feel that we must first determine just how many people we are talking about, after all, if we don't define the problem how can we fix it?
The usual number is 65 mil, (no matter because any number is only an estimate). Let's discuss a large chunk of these,the illegal immigrants. My thought is that we owe these people nothing,especially health care that we pay with our taxes. By removing this group we are now talking about a more manageable number. There is another large segment of the uninsured population, the young who opt not to have coverage. They work under the theory that they need a doctor only a few times, therefore, they self insure. A government plan would force these people to buy insurance, why? Shouldn't these young people have the right to choose how they spend their money? After all,they knew how to earn the money, they must be intelligent enough to know how to spend it. Leave these people alone. Let the youth learn what is important in their own lives, this would serve to strengthen their life resolve.
The next group, mostly the very wealthy, choose to self insure. Again my thought is to leave them alone. The government wants to force them to get coverage, and even worse, the government wants the taxpayers to pay. Do we need to spend our tax dollars on insuring people like Bill Gates?
When you take out those who fall into the above groups you have a more manageable number. Most of these would want insurance so we should make it more affordable. If we were to follow the suggestions outlined in my previous blog. many in this group could afford coverage. For those who don't. I would create an assigned risk type of pool. This was used in many states to insurance high risk auto drivers, why not use it in the health care field? Insurance companies would be compelled to write some percentage of this pool, probably based on what they write on policies outside the pool. Cheaper yes, and the best part is that it lets us only pik up the tab for the truly needy. We would see this through higher premiums on policies written outside the pool.
As fr now the subject is still under consideration, these are ideas which I feel would help us all, after all we are the people who pay taxes for any plan. Stay tuned.
Pray for the service people.
GOD Bless
In the last blog I forwarded some ideas for health care reform. I also deferred the reforms concerning those who are uninsured,not I will address that part of the problem.
There have been several numbers tossed around and I feel that we must first determine just how many people we are talking about, after all, if we don't define the problem how can we fix it?
The usual number is 65 mil, (no matter because any number is only an estimate). Let's discuss a large chunk of these,the illegal immigrants. My thought is that we owe these people nothing,especially health care that we pay with our taxes. By removing this group we are now talking about a more manageable number. There is another large segment of the uninsured population, the young who opt not to have coverage. They work under the theory that they need a doctor only a few times, therefore, they self insure. A government plan would force these people to buy insurance, why? Shouldn't these young people have the right to choose how they spend their money? After all,they knew how to earn the money, they must be intelligent enough to know how to spend it. Leave these people alone. Let the youth learn what is important in their own lives, this would serve to strengthen their life resolve.
The next group, mostly the very wealthy, choose to self insure. Again my thought is to leave them alone. The government wants to force them to get coverage, and even worse, the government wants the taxpayers to pay. Do we need to spend our tax dollars on insuring people like Bill Gates?
When you take out those who fall into the above groups you have a more manageable number. Most of these would want insurance so we should make it more affordable. If we were to follow the suggestions outlined in my previous blog. many in this group could afford coverage. For those who don't. I would create an assigned risk type of pool. This was used in many states to insurance high risk auto drivers, why not use it in the health care field? Insurance companies would be compelled to write some percentage of this pool, probably based on what they write on policies outside the pool. Cheaper yes, and the best part is that it lets us only pik up the tab for the truly needy. We would see this through higher premiums on policies written outside the pool.
As fr now the subject is still under consideration, these are ideas which I feel would help us all, after all we are the people who pay taxes for any plan. Stay tuned.
Pray for the service people.
GOD Bless
Monday, September 7, 2009
Government healthcare
Hi
There is a lot of discussion going on concerning government health care, now I am adding my opinion.
To really understand this situation we must look at the entire health care situation. We find it divided into segments with two glaring areas ripe for improvement. The first is the many uninsured and the second is the problems of cos and transferability of the insurance already in place. Lets address them separately.
For the easier problem involving cost and transferability there is an easy solution. Currently insurance companies are not allowed to write health care insurance across state lines. When you consider that we allow auto and life insurance companies to cross state lines, doesn't it make sense to allow health care companies to have the same opportunities. The lobbyists for the AARP and other groups that get monies from insurers claim that this will led to higher costs. Just the opposite is true. If an insurer in Pennsylvania is cheaper than one in Washington,DC, you can solve the problem by allowing the carrier in Pennsylvania to write insurance for DC Contrary to what these lobbyists say the insurance companies that charge lower premiums would not increase premiums, but, in order to keep customers, they would be forced to keep premiums low. Raising premiums only keeps new customers from changing their coverage. The higher priced coverage is the one that would lose and in order to keep their existing customers and attract new ones, those insurance carriers would have to lower their premiums. Now just multiply this scenario by the carriers in all states and you can see how the market place supply and demand principle would have a serious effect on lowering premiums.
The second problem facing those who have adequate coverage is the thing known as "preexisting conditions". This is usually one of the problems when an insured moves across state lines and must get new coverage. If we correct the requirement that only in state residents can be covered, we basically solve this problem. Why are politicians so reluctant to use common sense and pass this type of legislation? The American people deserve better from our elected leaders.
Another area of correction is the modification of tort reform legislation. Doctors and health care provider pay an enormous amount of money for malpractice insurance. Actually, we pay it through higher doctor fees. If we were to adopt some form of a cap on damages, especially punitive damages, we could lower costs. Again this is a problem for politicians because they serve special interests, namely groups like trial lawyers. Why don't the politicians look out for the people? I repeat, we deservebetter.
Still another area of correction that can be made is in the advertising of prescription medications. We've seen them all over our TV sets. They always add a caution to talk to your doctor. Great, but if my doctor needs me to tell him what prescription medicine is good for my condition, I want another doctor. The cost of these TV ads is just added to the cost of the medicine, wouldn't you rather have that cost transferred to research where new and better medication could be developed. I know I would.
In my nest writing I will address the question of the uninsured, bear with me and stay tuned.
Pray for our brave service people.
GOD Bless
There is a lot of discussion going on concerning government health care, now I am adding my opinion.
To really understand this situation we must look at the entire health care situation. We find it divided into segments with two glaring areas ripe for improvement. The first is the many uninsured and the second is the problems of cos and transferability of the insurance already in place. Lets address them separately.
For the easier problem involving cost and transferability there is an easy solution. Currently insurance companies are not allowed to write health care insurance across state lines. When you consider that we allow auto and life insurance companies to cross state lines, doesn't it make sense to allow health care companies to have the same opportunities. The lobbyists for the AARP and other groups that get monies from insurers claim that this will led to higher costs. Just the opposite is true. If an insurer in Pennsylvania is cheaper than one in Washington,DC, you can solve the problem by allowing the carrier in Pennsylvania to write insurance for DC Contrary to what these lobbyists say the insurance companies that charge lower premiums would not increase premiums, but, in order to keep customers, they would be forced to keep premiums low. Raising premiums only keeps new customers from changing their coverage. The higher priced coverage is the one that would lose and in order to keep their existing customers and attract new ones, those insurance carriers would have to lower their premiums. Now just multiply this scenario by the carriers in all states and you can see how the market place supply and demand principle would have a serious effect on lowering premiums.
The second problem facing those who have adequate coverage is the thing known as "preexisting conditions". This is usually one of the problems when an insured moves across state lines and must get new coverage. If we correct the requirement that only in state residents can be covered, we basically solve this problem. Why are politicians so reluctant to use common sense and pass this type of legislation? The American people deserve better from our elected leaders.
Another area of correction is the modification of tort reform legislation. Doctors and health care provider pay an enormous amount of money for malpractice insurance. Actually, we pay it through higher doctor fees. If we were to adopt some form of a cap on damages, especially punitive damages, we could lower costs. Again this is a problem for politicians because they serve special interests, namely groups like trial lawyers. Why don't the politicians look out for the people? I repeat, we deservebetter.
Still another area of correction that can be made is in the advertising of prescription medications. We've seen them all over our TV sets. They always add a caution to talk to your doctor. Great, but if my doctor needs me to tell him what prescription medicine is good for my condition, I want another doctor. The cost of these TV ads is just added to the cost of the medicine, wouldn't you rather have that cost transferred to research where new and better medication could be developed. I know I would.
In my nest writing I will address the question of the uninsured, bear with me and stay tuned.
Pray for our brave service people.
GOD Bless
Friday, September 4, 2009
Curt Schilling
Hi
By the title of this blog those of you who do not follow Major League Baseball may not recognize the name of Curt Schilling. Curt Schilling is a man who showed great dedication and work ethic when he pitched, especially in the World Series for the Boston Red Sox. Schilling is one who has had an interest in national politics even when playing professional baseball. The dedication that Schilling has shown is exactly what we need to clean up Washington. I prefer conservative candidates who have this zeal but even candidates who are honest, diligent and have good work ethics would be a great improvement over what we now have. Imagine, a politician who votes to do the right thing, not one who votes the pocketbook of special interests. Wouldn't that be a whiff of fresh air.
Not having political experience is a plus not a negative, the person is not tainted with the dirty money of the lobbyist or special interest.
Curt Schilling has expressed some possible interest in running to fill the seat left vacant by the passing of Ted Kennedy, I hope he runs and wins. All of my readers who would like to see some decent human beings run for office, please join me in doing whatever possible to see it happen.
Please remember our service people in your prayers.
GOD Bless
By the title of this blog those of you who do not follow Major League Baseball may not recognize the name of Curt Schilling. Curt Schilling is a man who showed great dedication and work ethic when he pitched, especially in the World Series for the Boston Red Sox. Schilling is one who has had an interest in national politics even when playing professional baseball. The dedication that Schilling has shown is exactly what we need to clean up Washington. I prefer conservative candidates who have this zeal but even candidates who are honest, diligent and have good work ethics would be a great improvement over what we now have. Imagine, a politician who votes to do the right thing, not one who votes the pocketbook of special interests. Wouldn't that be a whiff of fresh air.
Not having political experience is a plus not a negative, the person is not tainted with the dirty money of the lobbyist or special interest.
Curt Schilling has expressed some possible interest in running to fill the seat left vacant by the passing of Ted Kennedy, I hope he runs and wins. All of my readers who would like to see some decent human beings run for office, please join me in doing whatever possible to see it happen.
Please remember our service people in your prayers.
GOD Bless
Thursday, September 3, 2009
The lack of leadership is showing
Hi
It is finally showing, the White House and staff do not know what they are doing. We were warned by none other than our current Vice-president Joe Biden and our Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. During the primary season both voiced doubt as to the qualification of Obama to be our president and now it is starting to show. The examples are many, the rushing through of the so called stimulus bill which was merely a pork barrel piece of legislation. The attempt to push through Sonia Sotomayor as a Supreme Court Justice and now the complete breakdown if the health care reform bill.
We may be able to excuse and live with one but all of them. Hardly. This administration is totally without any type of leadership, only a hollow figurehead who reads from a teleprompter and is glib. Obama says one thing about investigation the CIA but the attorney general is doing the opposite. I know, the AG is supposed to be independent, but this is a blatant move by Obama, he can cover his rump by putting the blame on the AG. Pure politics, and not even good politics.
The latest is the attempt to brainwash children, (Goebbels anyone). No other president gave this type of speech to children, what is wrong,Mr Obama, does your dropping poll numbers worry you so much that you must grasp straws and go after the children? Mr Obama, where is the leadership?
More to come. Stay tuned.
Please pray for the troops.
GOD Bless
It is finally showing, the White House and staff do not know what they are doing. We were warned by none other than our current Vice-president Joe Biden and our Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. During the primary season both voiced doubt as to the qualification of Obama to be our president and now it is starting to show. The examples are many, the rushing through of the so called stimulus bill which was merely a pork barrel piece of legislation. The attempt to push through Sonia Sotomayor as a Supreme Court Justice and now the complete breakdown if the health care reform bill.
We may be able to excuse and live with one but all of them. Hardly. This administration is totally without any type of leadership, only a hollow figurehead who reads from a teleprompter and is glib. Obama says one thing about investigation the CIA but the attorney general is doing the opposite. I know, the AG is supposed to be independent, but this is a blatant move by Obama, he can cover his rump by putting the blame on the AG. Pure politics, and not even good politics.
The latest is the attempt to brainwash children, (Goebbels anyone). No other president gave this type of speech to children, what is wrong,Mr Obama, does your dropping poll numbers worry you so much that you must grasp straws and go after the children? Mr Obama, where is the leadership?
More to come. Stay tuned.
Please pray for the troops.
GOD Bless
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Catholic Legacy of Ted Kennedy
Hi
It's time to express my feelings concerning the Catholic legacy of Ted Kennedy. I just read an editorial piece written by Tim Rutten who appears to write for the Los Angeles Times.
Mr Rutten states a case that Kennedy met with Catholic theologians and after discussion and debate Kennedy came up with the idea that Catholic politicians can be personally opposed to abortion and still allow the government to allow to procedure. It always seemed to me that to be a Catholic one must obey the teachings of the Pope on questions of faith and morals. That is what I was taught as a child, doesn't that apply today? Numerous Popes have stated that abortion is te taking of a life and therefore contrary to the teachings of JESUS CHRIST. How come Kennedy can support an opposing view and still claim to be a catholic? How can Mr Rutten defend the actions of Kennedy? The real reason is that these people live by a different religion, liberalism. We have seen it in the words of Speaker Pelosi, the actions of such other Catholic politicians such as Kerry, Giuliani, Durbin, Daschle and others who go around campaigning for the Catholic vote but then support abortion. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Pope Benedict say that these people are publicly excommunicated? Why are we having this discussion, the old adage applies, "Rome spoke, the matter is closed."
Liberals live under the assumption that good intentions trump deeds. Then they define the meaning of good intentions. Does stealing the wages of working people (called taxes) and giving it to those who will not work constitute charity. Charity as taught by JESUS is supposed to be some thing which one gives from his heart, not legislated by politicians. We should get back to basic Christian teachings and straighten out the mess we have gotten ourselves into. I would love to see people run on a platform of "I will do the fair and just thing." Separation of church and state does not preclude this. This platform does not establish any single tenet or belief as government policy. Come on, we deserve better.
I ask you to do the right thing and pray for the safety of our service people.
GOD Bless
It's time to express my feelings concerning the Catholic legacy of Ted Kennedy. I just read an editorial piece written by Tim Rutten who appears to write for the Los Angeles Times.
Mr Rutten states a case that Kennedy met with Catholic theologians and after discussion and debate Kennedy came up with the idea that Catholic politicians can be personally opposed to abortion and still allow the government to allow to procedure. It always seemed to me that to be a Catholic one must obey the teachings of the Pope on questions of faith and morals. That is what I was taught as a child, doesn't that apply today? Numerous Popes have stated that abortion is te taking of a life and therefore contrary to the teachings of JESUS CHRIST. How come Kennedy can support an opposing view and still claim to be a catholic? How can Mr Rutten defend the actions of Kennedy? The real reason is that these people live by a different religion, liberalism. We have seen it in the words of Speaker Pelosi, the actions of such other Catholic politicians such as Kerry, Giuliani, Durbin, Daschle and others who go around campaigning for the Catholic vote but then support abortion. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Pope Benedict say that these people are publicly excommunicated? Why are we having this discussion, the old adage applies, "Rome spoke, the matter is closed."
Liberals live under the assumption that good intentions trump deeds. Then they define the meaning of good intentions. Does stealing the wages of working people (called taxes) and giving it to those who will not work constitute charity. Charity as taught by JESUS is supposed to be some thing which one gives from his heart, not legislated by politicians. We should get back to basic Christian teachings and straighten out the mess we have gotten ourselves into. I would love to see people run on a platform of "I will do the fair and just thing." Separation of church and state does not preclude this. This platform does not establish any single tenet or belief as government policy. Come on, we deserve better.
I ask you to do the right thing and pray for the safety of our service people.
GOD Bless
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)