| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/24/2009 9:03:42 PM | Ironic that a wealthy Congressman himself has been the recipient for government-funded health care for most of his adult life.
The following synopsis is taken from the following site where you can see the program:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/18/bill-moyers-tea-party-org_n_291625.html
This exclusive clip is from the latest episode of "Bill Moyers Journal," which airs tonight. In the episode, Moyers goes after FreedomWorks Chairman****Armey -- one of the key figures using large industry donations to fund "Tea Party" rallies around the country, such as the the 9/12 march in Washington DC last week.
"Here's the catch," Moyers says after showing video clips with protesters decrying "the lies" coming from the Obama administration. "Something these marchers who came to Washington at Armey's urging could hardly be expected to know. For most of his adult life, their leader has benefited from just the kind of government tax-supported health care he's fighting to keep them from having too."
It's a fascinating run down of Armey's adult life working in universities and for the government, made comfortable and secure by state-funded health care -- "the Cadillac of coverage."
"Dick Armey is the epitome of those people with power and privilege who are insured against the vicissitudes of life and want no government assistance for any suffering except their own," Moyers says.
Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/18/bill-moyers-tea-party-org_n_291625.html | |
|
wudger
|
Joined: 12/20/2007
Msg: 2 | |
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/24/2009 10:15:32 PM |
if we took healthcare away from congress till they came up with a solution, we'd have it tomorrow.
all these republican congressman and senators ****ing about healthcare get free federal healthcare for life, and thats about the fattest bennies package around. everything from no-copay to glasses. (wives too)
hypocritical louses. | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/24/2009 10:39:18 PM |
all these republican congressman and senators ****ing about healthcare get free federal healthcare for life, and thats about the fattest bennies package around. everything from no-copay to glasses. (wives too)
hypocritical louses.
Just the Republicans receive these benifits and no liberal **stards. | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/24/2009 10:48:40 PM | | I don't think the health care proposed for the masses is quite up to snuff compared to what Congress and the President receive. Only the best is good enough for them, don't you know. | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 4:28:52 AM | Another Republican hypocrite, Joe " You Lie " Wilson.
Wilson not only gets the same government health care provided to all congressmen, he, his wife and children are all on TRICARE. TRICARE is a government run health program for military personnel, veterans and their families. | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 4:33:16 AM | I'm hoping someone can explain to me the difference between health care that is employer provided, and the health care that the employers of these men are providing...
Is it only because their employer is the government that they are being disparaged or is there something I'm completely missing? | |
|
wudger
|
Joined: 12/20/2007
Msg: 7 | |
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 6:56:05 AM | yeah you are definitely missing something. they get it for LIFE. thats till they are DEAD. wives too.
Just the Republicans receive these benifits and no liberal **stards.
ummm did you notice the republicans are fighting giving citizens healthcare and the **stard dems are trying to provide it? and have been for a decade now?
little difference there? | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 6:58:15 AM |
yeah you are definitely missing something. they get it for LIFE. thats till they are DEAD. wives too. I know of employers that are not government agencies that do this also... I'm still failing to see the difference. | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 7:58:22 AM | Bill Moyers is certainly a beacon of objectivity, and we can count on Arianna Huffington to present all sides of a debate in her fair and balanced publications.
I haven't seen or heard any Republicans say people shouldn't have healthcare. I have heard Republicans and Democrats express serious doubts about the effectiveness and efficiency of a government run health care agency. | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 8:00:01 AM |
I know of employers that are not government agencies that do this also... I'm still failing to see the difference.
At first I was on board with you, thinking it's insurance provided thru employment which just happens to be for the government. But I don't know anyone who retired from government service and continues to get medical insurance without paying for it. | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 8:36:06 AM | I agree with Lint Spotter. There is no difference other than the scale or quality of the insurance. Having health insurance or other benefits is just a part of the payment that they receive for the job that they do. When looking at how much many of our officials are 'paid', most people only look at the dollar amount. If you add in total value of other forms of compensation (such as health care plans that cost 100k a year), most are actually making at least twice the amount of their listed salary.
If you have a problem with the health care that they receive, then you are (or should be) actually taking issue with the total compensation for their job. Unfortunately, congress sets the salary and benefits package for itself and many other federal employees, and they have incentive to make their total compensation less transparent (by making much of their 'payment' non-monetary).
There is nothing hypocritical about being against government run healthcare for all, while at the same time receiving health care as part of the benefits of your employment. Reports such as these are just an attempt to shame rich people for being rich or to enlist the poor into class warfare (an approach that has worked in the past). | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 8:41:22 AM | Many Republicans, and addmittedly some Democrats, are making a lot of noise about not wanting to "mess" with 1/6th of our economy; ie the healthcare and insurance industries. The 30 percent overhead of private insurers is apparently conservsative enough for them. LMFAO.
Witthout a public option there is no healthcare reform, period. We spend far more than other developed countries for our healthcare and get FAR less despite any deceitfully unsubstantiated rhetoric you might hear.
Government can run things right, its certain people in government that have an interest in not doing that. Reembracing accountability would address that. There are several industries I never would have supported the privatization of to the extent we have. Healthcare, Auto insurance [remember what happened with the proposed gas tax in California to cover EVERYONE on the road that would have kept people from going bankrupt from uninsured drivers], Highway construction, incarceration[that in itself is un-American] Public Lands fee collections...
"Think! Its very patriotic."
Great post OP, thank you. | |
|
wudger
|
Joined: 12/20/2007
Msg: 13 | |
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 9:23:12 AM |
There is nothing hypocritical about being against government run healthcare for all, while at the same time receiving health care as part of the benefits of your employment. Reports such as these are just an attempt to shame rich people for being rich or to enlist the poor into class warfare (an approach that has worked in the past).
for LIFE? employment yes. life no.
name me a company that provides their employees with healthcare for life for as little as two years service? seems to me that if we are doing that for our congressmen, we should do it for all federal employees no matter their term of employment.
what makes congress so special? | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 9:26:42 AM | | That is my question, do they continue to receive government healthcare benefits after they are out of office? I haven't had time to research in great depth. My initial searches indicate that if they were in congress for at least 6 years, they will receive the health benefits for life. If anyone can confirm, then I do have a huge issue with it. They would never have to face issue of paying full cost of COBRA and then losing insurance after 18 months like the rest of Americans that receive their benefits from their employer. | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 9:27:59 AM | name me a company that provides their employees with healthcare for life for as little as two years service? seems to me that if we are doing that for our congressmen, we should do it for all federal employees no matter their term of employment.
what makes congress so special? If two years is the standard term prior to retirement, then by all means they are entitled after two years to this benefit.
It's a perk of the job... just like I have perks and so many other people have perks... they have this one...
By your reasoning, we should only ever allow a person the absolute least benefit that any company gives... so if you receive a Christmas bonus, then by gawd give that back because others don't and exactly... what makes you so special?
As for all federal employees... if it's in the contract, then great... if not, I'm sure they get other perks... | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 10:00:27 AM | If you have a problem with the way that their benefits are set up, then try to find a way to change them (For the record: I am in favor of this). Their benefits ARE absurd, but they are still entitled to them at the moment. I feel that their benefits should be changed, but I am not going to fault them for taking advantage of the benefits while they have them.
What makes congress so special is that the people electing them aren't holding them accountable when they decide to give themselves absurd compensation. Whether that compensation be monetary, health care, air travel, free cars, free room / board, free free free..... | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 11:38:56 AM | That is my question, do they continue to receive government healthcare benefits after they are out of office?
Yes, until they become eligible for Medicare. If they start collecting Social Security, they lose their Congressional coverage and start getting Medicare. The only way they can keep their Congressional insurance coverage rather than go on Medicare is to delay collecting Social Security. Curiously, Armey *sued* and tried to be able to both collect Social Security *and* continue being covered under his Congressional insurance.
The point is, he's never had to fend for himself like many of the rest of us and he's gotten some of the best insurance coverage available, all at taxpayer expense. They should have to buy individual insurance, like those of us who are forced to do this, and find out what it's like to pay higher premiums for less coverage, be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions, or be denied completely because of pre-existing conditions. Or be dropped, either because your insurance company decided to drop all it's individual policies or because you've been sick and used it.
As a retired Congressman, Armey is covered by the taxpayers for life. He doesn't have to worry about his company downsizing and losing his benefits. Yet he fights against others being able to opt in for the same coverage he enjoys. *And* by suing to retain his Congressional coverage while collecting Social Security, he's trying to get even more than he's been entitled to. By his own admission, he makes *lots* of money, something he brags about. So, it seems he wants the best for himself and too bad for others who lose their insurance because they lost their jobs, or work in jobs like WalMart that don't provide insurance for most of their employees (and, by the way, depend on Medicaid to pick up the slack), or the self-employed.
It just seems a bit ironic. | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 11:52:58 AM | Another Republican hypocrite, Joe " You Lie " Wilson.
this is so old, i think its disgracefull that he did that, the same way it was when the dems booed bush during his state of the union, and the way they called him a liar, u cant have it both ways, not may people cried when they did it to bush now they want to make it a big deal because they did it to obama. no public offical should do that. as far as health care goes, i think it will be really bad if the goverment runs it, just like every other program they run. they all suck and i dont trust a single one of them period. | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 1:32:40 PM | I think there is an important point which most people miss and needs to be clarified.
Nobody's talking about government run health care !
That's right.... nobody wants government run health care.
We don't have a heath care problem in this country.
The USA has the best health care in the world and nobody wants to change it.
We don't have a health care problem......we have a PAYING FOR IT problem.
We have the absolutely best health care in the world.
It's just that nobody can afford to pay for it.
A lot of citizens of the USA are convinced that Canada has socialized medicine.
That's a lie.
Canada doesn't have socialized medicine....Canada has socialized health insurance.
In Canada the government handles the paying part. Doctors in Canada do what they think is right for their patients. The government pays for it and everybody pays the government.
Naturally, this is what the health insurance companies hate. If we adopted a system like Canada, the health insurance companies wouldn't get to screw us all like they've been doing all this time. The pharmaceutical companies wouldn't get to screw us all anymore. The medical technology companies wouldn't get to screw us all like they've been doing all this time.
There are too many corporations making too much money to ever allow any meaningful reform of the system in the USA.
Heath care will NEVER be reformed in the USA until even MILLIONAIRES in the USA can't get coverage.
When millionaires start dying because they can't afford to get sick, then there will be meaningful change.
Until then...... it's all just wishful thinking. | |
|
| |
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 3:00:02 PM | | What drags down our numbers and makes us #37 is the people that don't have access to good healthcare or healthcare period. I bet if you could factor out those people and only look at the Americans with the great insurance plans we would be much higher. Unfortunately that is fewer people every day and those that have it, want to make sure they keep what they got regardless of those with next to nothing. They don't seem to recognize that it is unsustainable and we are all a job away from being uninsured. (Unless of course you are a congressman, then you are good for life). | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 3:06:44 PM |
When millionaires start dying because they can't afford to get sick
Last I heard, millionaires die right along with the rest of us. Sorry, I couldn't resist. My smart aleck remarks are out of my system for another month. | |
|
wudger
|
Joined: 12/20/2007
Msg: 23 | |
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 3:21:20 PM | by 2020 projections show sixty million americans without health coverage.
by 2030 projections show that number moving to almost 80 million.
in 2007 the US spent $2.2 trillion dollars on healthcare or 16 per cent of the gross domestic product. or to put it another way, $7,421 per person or about twice what the other G8 nations spend per person on health care (and they insure everybody).
by 2030 it will be 28 per cent of the GDP
by 2040 it will be 34 per cent of the GDP
do some simple math. the country can't support spending 34% of its total national product and be even remotely competitive.
keep it up. the chinese are eating our lunch now. just wait till we are spending a third of our national income on health care. | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 3:31:49 PM | If the government is the solution, then it was a bad question to begin with.
Social Security - Bankrupt
Post Office - Bankrupt
Medicare - Bankrupt
Medicaid - Bankrupt
The govt does a worse job than private industry because they have no profit incentive. | |
|
| Opponent of Gov't. Health Care Receives It Himself
Posted: 9/25/2009 3:47:01 PM | | So what do we do with the people with pre-existing conditions? I don't understand how the profit motive will work with healthcare. You have to refuse or jettison the sick, you can't make money on them. Nor will there ever be any competition for these people, I don't care if you allow people to cross state lines to buy insurance. A company whose goal is profit will not take those that are going to cost them money. | |
|
Home
login 
