Banks are just MEAN!!!!

[OhioFiler]

My friend fell down 2 steps one night and broke two bones in his back. He thought that he had good health insurance. Guess what the result was of his visit to the hospital. BANKRUPTCY

Your friend is a great example of what health insurance was originally designed to cover: Major catastrophic medical events.

Unfortunately, it morphed into coverage for everything including prescriptions, routine office visits, bandages and malpractice coverage etc. Covering everything drives the price of insurance up and up and up! It's no longer insurance but rather just a conduit to pay your medical expenses through.

[backtoschool]

Well that's not what I meant. You can get rid of insurance entirely and the cost of healthcare remains static. My point was you are most likely more concerned about the cost of insurance not the cost of the actual care.

The solution to the cost of healthcare isn't to be found in Washington DC doing more. Every time Congress tries to fix something it becomes more broken. What we need is Congress to get out of the regulation business. Let the states handle these issues.

I do not think the states will be any more effective at regulating health care than the federal government has been.

And if you got rid of insurance, the cost of healthcare would go up quite a bit. Insurance companies actively negotiate with health care providers to keep costs in line. Without this check and balance, healthcare costs would go up quite a bit.

[OhioFiler]

I do not think the states will be any more effective at regulating health care than the federal government has been.

And if you got rid of insurance, the cost of healthcare would go up quite a bit. Insurance companies actively negotiate with health care providers to keep costs in line. Without this check and balance, healthcare costs would go up quite a bit.

Of course the states will be more effective. Look how "healthcare" reform is going in DC right now. Votes are being purchased. The federal government can't manage anything effectively. Look at how the House Bank and House Post Office debacles played out.

Healthcare costs in a TRULY free market would come down. The negotiations going on now between providers and insurers is done within the context of a closed system. Why is is possible that other markets can be handled via the principles of free market but somehow the healthcare market can not be run that way?

Some time before you were born there was no health insurance and its earliest incarnations were merely for major medical. That system worked, it can work again.

[JustFileSuit]

They need to be replaced by common people,, farmers, grocery clerks, waitresses, mechanics for one term service. All lawyers should be prohibited from holding public office

Here, folks, is the Real Key.

You end up with the Government that you vote for. Voting is the process whereby you can remove, without force or violence, the incumbents that are worthless. If the collective majority simply refused to vote for any candidate that was an attorney, and ONLY for good people with common sense, then the nonsense that passes for government would dissipate soon enough.

The original State Houses and Washington were populated with farmers, trader businessmen, and retired soldiers. Now it is virtually all "lawyers." Who made that change? We all did. We voted for them. Now we get the result.

Lawyers belong in the court room, not the State House. Vote for good folks with solid personal reputations, and these problems start to go away fast enough.

[WhatMoney]

Here, folks, is the Real Key.

The original State Houses and Washington were populated with farmers, trader businessmen, and retired soldiers. Now it is virtually all "lawyers." Who made that change? We all did. We voted for them. Now we get the result.

Lawyers belong in the court room, not the State House. Vote for good folks with solid personal reputations, and these problems start to go away fast enough.

Well, let's check some facts here. About 40% of the present Congress were practicing lawyers before becoming elected to office. That means 60% of Congressmen are NOT lawyers. So I don't know how you think they are all lawyers.

I have found no correlation between the quality of the Congressional lawmakers and that they are/were lawyers. If you can show the 40% of the lawyers in Congess are all bums, and the remaining 60% of the NON-lawyers are wonderful honest people, then you might have a point.

But I do agree that there are some great Congressmen that are not lawyers. Al Franken, Senator from Minnesota for example. We need more of his kind of non-lawyers in the Congress!

[JustFileSuit]

[QUOTE=WhatMoney;360537]

Well, let's check some facts here. About 40% of the present Congress were practicing lawyers before becoming elected to office. That means 60% of Congressmen are NOT lawyers. So I don't know how you think they are all lawyers.

OK, I was not parsing it out. I should have stated: "are trained as lawyers." Check out how many attended a law school and you see what I mean.

I have found no correlation between the quality of the Congressional lawmakers and that they are/were lawyers.

Please do keep in mind that I live in Connecticut and we have Senators Lieberman and Dodd to contend with. Or to be more accurate: Senator Aetna Corp. and Senator Countrywide Financial Corp. It does tend to color my perspective, so please forgive me.

Just lovely.

[WhatMoney]

OK, I was not parsing it out. I should have stated: "are trained as lawyers." Check out how many attended a law school and you see what I mean.

How do you find out how many dropped out of law school? You mean most of Congress are law school dropouts? I did not know that...

My numbers are 217 that practiced law, and 228 that have law degrees, out of 535 members of Congress.

It's the people that elect these folks, and given that lawyers tend to be more eloquent and persuasive in their public speeches, and are accustomed to bargaining with adversaries, it's not surprising they are attracted to politics and win local elections. It's possible the term lawmaker may also attract a lawyer to run for congress.

But I think it's the lobbying money that makes many in congress evil paid for big business wh*res. Perhaps we should only elect to congress those with enough old family wealth to be above accepting campaign financing and paybacks. A minimum family wealth of $1 Billion dollars as an election requirement would assure we only get honest members of congress. On the other hand, I'm not sure I'd trust Tony, the florist down the street, or Joe the plumber to not succumb to the lobbyists.

The early members of congress were often the wealthy landowners and businessmen. If a Congress of wealthy, educated, and elite men worked then, why not now? (I'm still thinking about JR's proposal to return to the pre civil war days where there was no mail delivery. The slaves could just pick it up at the post office, makes sense... Life was so simple and idyllic in the "good old days", for the privileged white man.)

[OhioFiler]

Well, let's check some facts here. About 40% of the present Congress were practicing lawyers before becoming elected to office. That means 60% of Congressmen are NOT lawyers. So I don't know how you think they are all lawyers.

I have found no correlation between the quality of the Congressional lawmakers and that they are/were lawyers. If you can show the 40% of the lawyers in Congess are all bums, and the remaining 60% of the NON-lawyers are wonderful honest people, then you might have a point.

But I do agree that there are some great Congressmen that are not lawyers. Al Franken, Senator from Minnesota for example. We need more of his kind of non-lawyers in the Congress!

The problem isn't these clowns are failed attorneys looking to make a buck off the taxpayer, though many of them are failed attorneys. The problem is they are all career politicians who become interested in nothing more than power and continuing their taxpayer teat suckling.

Al Franken is a failed comedian who was elected in a fraud filled election. He is and will continue to be a joke in the Senate. There is no way he'll win reelection in 2014.

The answer is term limits.

[AngelinaCatHub]

The problem isn't these clowns are failed attorneys looking to make a buck off the taxpayer, though many of them are failed attorneys. The problem is they are all career politicians who become interested in nothing more than power and continuing their taxpayer teat suckling.

Al Franken is a failed comedian who was elected in a fraud filled election. He is and will continue to be a joke in the Senate. There is no way he'll win reelection in 2014.

The answer is term limits.

If you gave then all a six year single term, then they would do their best for the Country and not for themselves to receive the next vote. That goes for the Pres as well. 'Hub

[backtoschool]

The problem isn't these clowns are failed attorneys looking to make a buck off the taxpayer, though many of them are failed attorneys. The problem is they are all career politicians who become interested in nothing more than power and continuing their taxpayer teat suckling.

Al Franken is a failed comedian who was elected in a fraud filled election. He is and will continue to be a joke in the Senate. There is no way he'll win reelection in 2014.

The answer is term limits.

Al Franken is a great comedian! Some of those old Saturday Night Live skits that he wrote are hilarious.

Not sure how that qualifies him to be a senator though, but at least he is a liberal which is a good thing.

[AngelinaCatHub]

Al Franken is a great comedian! Some of those old Saturday Night Live skits that he wrote are hilarious.

Not sure how that qualifies him to be a senator though, but at least he is a liberal which is a good thing.

He is no more comical than the other congresspeople. Being a Liberal as I am seeing it today is tantamount to being a Socialist. That is not a good thing in what used to be a free Country. Only my opinion with all due respect. 'Hub

[OhioFiler]

Al Franken is a great comedian! Some of those old Saturday Night Live skits that he wrote are hilarious.

Not sure how that qualifies him to be a senator though, but at least he is a liberal which is a good thing.

Yes, liberalism has solved all of our problems.

[backtoschool]

Yes, liberalism has solved all of our problems.

Well, liberalism has solved just about the same amount of problems that conservatism has.

[OhioFiler]

Well, liberalism has solved just about the same amount of problems that conservatism has.

Of course.

The GREATEST country ever on earth was established based on conservative ideals. They are documented in a paper titled United States Constitution. You should look it up some day when you have some free time.

[frogger]

If you gave then all a six year single term, then they would do their best for the Country and not for themselves to receive the next vote. That goes for the Pres as well. 'Hub

On this, I disagree.

Career politicians, which is what we have in DC, did not get their start in DC. They start at the local level, running for something, or perhaps running for anything.

From local, they more up to state, and then to federal, and in the case of our most recent president, to that office. Next, he'll be running for head of the UN.

Term limits are good and I agree in principal with them, however they will not stop the problem. After their term is up, then they join up with a lobby or get appointed to a position, or something else, they just won't go away.

Until we figure out how to actually GET RID of them, they're just like a bad case of the clap that won't go away. Too bad that penicillin won't work on congress......