I'm a simple man but why can't this administration

[oumartin]

Wait on this massive healthcare reform?
600 Billion!!!

If this administration is so confident and so full of themselves can't they wait until their next terms? The system has been this way for years. Why not wait a couple more years. Why not work on the deficit and unemployment?

The only thing good I have seen out of this administration is they damn sure know how to spend money this country doesn't have.

I dont claim to be half as intelligent as all of you geniuses but everytime I watch or read any news there is some number with the word billion behind it in the headlines.

[Curly Bill]

The more peeps find out how Obama-care would (would not) work the more upset they're gonna be. They're trying to get this pig passed before the smell of it turns everyone's stomach.

*everyone meaning us regular peeps

[1890MilesToNorman]

Billion is the new million and trillion is fast becoming the new Billion? There just numbers, they apparently don't mean anything? Except to thinking folk.

Yer thinkin again so stop it!!!

[batonrougesooner]

Economy in the dumps, largest deficit of all time, and Obama wants to cram another trillion dollar program through the system. This is all moving too fast. And I suspect that is by design. I bet he is begining to see that he will lose control of congress in 2010.

[yermom]

have they actually lined out what "reform" even means yet?

i'll reserve my panic in the streets until i know how i'm getting screwed.

i'm a little more worried about what else they are tacking on in the process...

[MrJimBeam]

The legislation calls for a 5.4 percent tax increase on individuals making more than $1 million a year, with a gradual tax beginning at $280,000 for individuals. Employers who don't provide coverage would be hit with a penalty equal to 8 percent of workers' wages, with an exemption for small businesses. Individuals who decline an offer of affordable coverage would pay 2.5 percent of their incomes as a penalty, up to the average cost of a health insurance plan. This is the house plan. I find it hard to believe something like this is happening in America.

[oumartin]

So companies will cut back their workforces and you won't see another pay raise in your lifetime so they can cover these new costs?

[adoniijahsooner]

Economy in the dumps, largest deficit of all time, and Obama wants to cram another trillion dollar program through the system. This is all moving too fast. And I suspect that is by design. I bet he is begining to see that he will lose control of congress in 2010.

Wishful thinking. in order for the republicans to regain control, they need effective policies as well. The whole political system needs to thrown in the toilet.

[yermom]

i can agree with that...

[olevetonahill]

A billion here a billion there
before long ya gonna be talkin serious money :D

[batonrougesooner]

The thing that people fail to understand is that health insurance doesn't equal health care. Look at medicaid and medicare. They are considered health insurance (the fact that it is really a government entitlement and not insurance per se is a fact we can ignore for now). The problem is that fewer and fewer physicians are accepting these programs because their reimbursements are set by the government and are too low to allow a physician to remain financially viable. The physicians that do accept these plans severely limit the number of people with these plans into their practices. They can't afford to subsidize these patients on a large scale. Many physicians either break even or even lose money on each of these patients. The doctors have the fixed overhead of running their practice such as paying staff, rent, etc and then need to make a living on top of that. My point is that the government can package something and call it insurance but if it won't provide reimbursement high enough to allow your doctor to provide the care, what good has it really done you?

[soonersis]

My simple solution, hire more investigators to get the Medicare/insurance fraud in check. And possibly educate the individuals receiving either Medicare or Medicaid that the emergency room is just that, for emergencies. These too things alone could cut spending by millions, if not billions.

[badger]

I'm still fairly young, so I can recall a time of having lots of money that I never earned or worked for being spent on me... you know, the whole parental thing.

Perhaps these Dems are just trying to be the mommy that didn't hug you enough and spoil you enough as a child? ;)

[1890MilesToNorman]

I'm going back to paying my doc in chickens and pigs, and that's only if he does a house call. I'll pitch him some gubment cheese if he makes me laugh during the visit.

[OklahomaTuba]

Its simple really, "never waste a crisis" as they say in the White House these days.

Obama and the extreme left-wing have a massive statist agenda, and that takes any and all priority over any other issue such as the economy, national security, etc.

All one has to do is look at how successful Porkulus has been. Its a dismal failure.

The agenda is the only way you can explain the reckless drunken spending, the proposed tax & regulation increases and the assault on those folks who kept us safe from attacks for the last 8 years.

[adoniijahsooner]

I have a suspicion that people are more afraid of a socialistic healthplan, than whether a doctor gets paid. Something must be done about healthcare, unemployment, deficit, Afghan war, n. korea, education, and i could go on forever. To ask an administration to focus on what you want is unreasonable, especially considering many here didnt even vote for obama, and if they did it wasnt for his policies. Big government will always try to take care of it's people, no matter the cost. you'll destroy your mental stability if you get concerned every time obama digs into his wallet and pulls out a crisp billion dollar bill.

[yermom]

ah yes, those saints that protected us from evil and drove our country into the toilet in the process

[OklahomaTuba]

Think Gubment healthcare is good?

Ask an Indian...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090615/ap_on_go_ot/us_health_care_s_forgotten

[adoniijahsooner]

or we could try and take excellent care of ourselves, and not drink, smoke, and eat unhealthy foods. also, excercise daily.

[1890MilesToNorman]

His Wallet? I don't think so.

[adoniijahsooner]

His Wallet? I don't think so.
;)

[1890MilesToNorman]

Drinkins good, smokins good and steak is damn good. What's yer point?

[OklahomaTuba]

ah yes, those saints that protected us from evil and drove our country into the toilet in the processSo hows that hope and change working out for you? Still have a job hopefully??

[adoniijahsooner]

Drinkins good, smokins good and steak is damn good. What's yer point?

it wouldnt be so expensive if the nation was a bit healthier is all.

[1890MilesToNorman]

It wouldn't be so expensive it wasn't so dang regulated! :D

[OklahomaTuba]

it wouldnt be so expensive if the nation was a bit healthier is all.Tort reform.

But you won't hear that idea come from any Donks. The trial lawyers give them too many donations, and the liberals just want more power over people.

[adoniijahsooner]

Kathleen Sebelius is secretary of Health and Human Services in the Obama administration.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/07/15/sebelius.health.reform/index.html


(CNN) -- Today in Washington, some politicians like to suggest that the many challenges we face as a nation mean we shouldn't tackle health care reform.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

With more and more of America's families, businesses, and local, state and federal governments struggling with the crushing costs of health care, health care reform has never been more important.

As President Obama has often said, you can't fix the economy without fixing health care. Unless we fix what is broken in our current system, everyone's health care will be in jeopardy. Health care reform is not a luxury. It is a necessity.

It's important to look at the size of the problem we face and where we stand. Today, we have by far the most expensive health system in the world. We spend 50 percent more per person on health care than the average developed country, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. We spend more on health care than housing or food, the McKinsey Global Institute reported.

Nearly 46 million Americans are uninsured, millions more are underinsured, and they aren't the only ones who are suffering. The high cost of care is hurting all of us. A recent study by Families USA estimates that insured families pay a hidden health tax of more than $1,000 every year. The hidden tax is the amount businesses and families with insurance have to pay in insurance premiums, taxes and donations to help cover the cost of treating uninsured Americans.

Don't Miss
House Democrats unveil health reform plan
Commentary: Make health care affordable
Commentary: Health care costs are out of control
In Depth: Commentaries
Health insurance premiums for families that are covered through a job at a small business have increased 85 percent since 2000, and more small businesses are thinking about dropping health insurance benefits.

Nationwide, health care costs consume 18 percent of our gross domestic product. If we continue on our current path, health care costs will consume 34 percent of our GDP by 2040, and the number of uninsured Americans will rise to 72 million, according to the Council of Economic Advisers.

Even though we spend more than any other nation on health care, we aren't healthier. Only three developed countries have higher infant mortality rates. Our nation ranks 24th in life expectancy among developed countries. More than one-third of Americans are obese.

These statistics are the signs of a system that is both unacceptable and unsustainable. They also show us the high cost of doing nothing. If we choose the status quo, more Americans will be uninsured, costs will continue to rise, and every American's health care will be at risk.

Inaction is not an option, and reform is long overdue. The Obama administration is working to enact reform that will reduce costs for families, businesses and government; protect people's choice of doctors, hospitals and health plans; and assure affordable, quality health care for all Americans. We are guided by a simple principle: Protect what works about health care and fix what's broken, and do it in a way that does not add to the deficit.

The president has already introduced proposals that will provide $950 billion over 10 years in savings to finance health care reform. Much of these resources come from wringing waste out of the current system and aggressively prosecuting fraud and abuse.

We will continue to work with Congress as it explores other financing options, and the president is open to ideas about how we finance health care reform. But we are not open to deficit spending. Health care reform will be paid for, and it will be deficit-neutral over 10 years.

Working together, we can pass real health care reform that gives Americans the choices they deserve and the affordable, quality coverage they need. And we know they do not want us to wait. Too many people have suffered without basic medical care or paid too much for it.

For years, the American people have called on Washington to meet this challenge. They have waited long enough. The time for reform is now.

[JohnnyMack]

Its simple really, "never waste a crisis" as they say in the White House these days.

Obama and the extreme left-wing have a massive statist agenda, and that takes any and all priority over any other issue such as the economy, national security, etc.

All one has to do is look at how successful Porkulus has been. Its a dismal failure.

The agenda is the only way you can explain the reckless drunken spending, the proposed tax & regulation increases and the assault on those folks who kept us safe from attacks for the last 8 years.

Tuba I think the pathetic thing about your worldview is your honest belief that your side is right and the other side is wrong. On every, single, issue. Your inability to see that both administrations are pieces of crap is what hamstrings you.

[JohnnyMack]

The legislation calls for a 5.4 percent tax increase on individuals making more than $1 million a year, with a gradual tax beginning at $280,000 for individuals. Employers who don't provide coverage would be hit with a penalty equal to 8 percent of workers' wages, with an exemption for small businesses. Individuals who decline an offer of affordable coverage would pay 2.5 percent of their incomes as a penalty, up to the average cost of a health insurance plan. This is the house plan. I find it hard to believe something like this is happening in America.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the mandatory enrollment you speak of (the 8% penalty) off the table now? I could have sworn Rahm Emmanuel had a meeting last week with some members of Congress and that got pulled (which it should have).

[batonrougesooner]

I have a suspicion that people are more afraid of a socialistic healthplan, than whether a doctor gets paid.

But if your doctor doesn't get paid, who is going to provide the care? They go hand in hand.

[OklahomaTuba]

Your inability to see that both administrations are pieces of crap is what hamstrings you.So I guess you missed that this thread is about the current administration, not the previous one that wasn't trying to socialize our health industry??? Its ok, we know your grasp on issues is thin at best..

[JohnnyMack]

So I guess you missed that this thread is about the current administration, not the previous one that wasn't trying to socialize our health industry??? Its ok, we know your grasp on issues is thin at best..

This:


Its simple really, "never waste a crisis" as they say in the White House these days.

Obama and the extreme left-wing have a massive statist agenda, and that takes any and all priority over any other issue such as the economy, national security, etc.

All one has to do is look at how successful Porkulus has been. Its a dismal failure.

The agenda is the only way you can explain the reckless drunken spending, the proposed tax & regulation increases and the assault on those folks who kept us safe from attacks for the last 8 years.

Never waste a crisis? W never did that.

Question, when W mailed you those stimulus checks (both times) did you cash them or mail them back?

[adoniijahsooner]

But if your doctor doesn't get paid, who is going to provide the care? They go hand in hand.

look at cuba; they get paid, not much, but they get paid nonetheless. The doctor visits arent what kills me; its the medicine cost.

[batonrougesooner]

And how do you "get control of costs" as the administration often says? You can shift the costs away from the individual to the collective tax payer. You can refuse to pay for certain procedures. You can pay the hospitals and doctors less, or at least try to. This goes against the populist sentiment, but it isn't like the hospitals and doctors are raking in money from the medicare/medicaid programs. Like I mentioned, they are breaking even or losing money. What happens when the government spreads these models even further, covering even more people? You can't pay less for something and expect to get more of it.

[adoniijahsooner]

This:



Never waste a crisis? W never did that.

Question, when W mailed you those stimulus checks (both times) did you cash them or mail them back?

i bought a computer and 9mm with mine, and spent the rest on hookers.:D

[batonrougesooner]

look at cuba; they get paid, not much, but they get paid nonetheless. The doctor visits arent what kills me; its the medicine cost.

So you want us to emulate Cuba?:confused:

[OklahomaTuba]

This:



Never waste a crisis? W never did that.

Question, when W mailed you those stimulus checks (both times) did you cash them or mail them back?Cashed mine, and had a nice dinner on W, thank ya very much. You??

BTW, I wonder which "stimulus" worked better?? Giving people their own money back, or giving ACORN and the other liberal special interest groups their kick backs in the Porkulus bill?

About the same amount of money was spent doing both...

[yermom]

So hows that hope and change working out for you? Still have a job hopefully??

i'm way more anti-Bush than i am pro-Obama

i don't get all this empathy and confidence in the CEOs of America and their desire to help their fellow man

our job situation has been pretty crappy for a while anyway. since we don't really make anything in the US anymore, i'm not sure what our economy is, other than a house of cards

in like 50 years we've gone from a nation of hard workers to a nation of idiots that buys shiny things

[adoniijahsooner]

And how do you "get control of costs" as the administration often says? You can shift the costs away from the individual to the collective tax payer. You can refuse to pay for certain procedures. You can pay the hospitals and doctors less, or at least try to. This goes against the populist sentiment, but it isn't like the hospitals and doctors are raking in money from the medicare/medicaid programs. Like I mentioned, they are breaking even or losing money. What happens when the government spreads these models even further, covering even more people? You can't pay less for something and expect to get more of it.

so should we just leave it alone? healthcare reform has been talked about for years, and nothing has ever come of it. during the election, obama mentioned sitting down with doctors on national tv and discussing this issue for all the world to see; but that never happened; it's still my opinion that we should give his plan a go, to see whether it fails or not. He said he could cost and actually save billions with his plan.

[OklahomaTuba]

So you want us to emulate Cuba?:confused:Why not? Its cheap and readily avialable. And they don't have wasteful energy consuming medical devices like CAT scan machines to worry people with.

[soonerhubs]

Wait on this massive healthcare reform?
600 Billion!!!

If this administration is so confident and so full of themselves can't they wait until their next terms? The system has been this way for years. Why not wait a couple more years. Why not work on the deficit and unemployment?


:pop:

So far the thread's initial question has not been answered.


So far I haven't read a good reason for needing this crap pushed through in such an expedient manner.

[JohnnyMack]

i'm way more anti-Bush than i am pro-Obama

i don't get all this empathy and confidence in the CEOs of America and their desire to help their fellow man

our job situation has been pretty crappy for a while anyway. since we don't really make anything in the US anymore, i'm not sure what our economy is, other than a house of cards

in like 50 years we've gone from a nation of hard workers to a nation of idiots that buys shiny things

I agree. The question I often ask is was it "free markets" and the ease with which jobs were allowed to be outsourced that led to this or was it the workers unionizing and driving up wages that is the real culprit. I suspect a little of both, but I'll just chill until Tuba comes in over the top and screeches about it being the fault of the TOTUS or the squanderer or whatever fun catch-phrase he's adopted this month.

[adoniijahsooner]

So you want us to emulate Cuba?:confused:

of course not. you think im some communists?

[OklahomaTuba]

our job situation has been pretty crappy for a while anyway.

About a year ago it was about half nationally. For most of this decade its been very good actually, near full employment actually.

Problem is we now compete globally more so than every before, and that is a good thing long-term, but painful short term.

The labor unions haven't figured this out though, which is why the companies they exist in are going out of business or moving over seas.

Taxing the hell out of companies will only result in more employers moving overseas.

I believe they tried a similar tactic in the 1930s. It ended up turning a recession into the great depression, and we are marching into that same abyss i'm afraid with national healthcare, cap and tax, porkulus II, government motors, etc.

[oumartin]

I'd rather pay higher healthcare premiums and pick my own doctore than pay higher taxes and have to stand for any medical procedures. But thats me.

I'm not sucking on the government teet yet.

[batonrougesooner]

so should we just leave it alone? healthcare reform has been talked about for years, and nothing has ever come of it. during the election, obama mentioned sitting down with doctors on national tv and discussing this issue for all the world to see; but that never happened; it's still my opinion that we should give his plan a go, to see whether it fails or not. He said he could cost and actually save billions with his plan.

But how? What are you willing to give up to give his plan a go? How do you save billions? By just saying "We are going to save billions!"? He is very very vague in regards to where his savings will come from. You could just quit paying the hospitals, doctors, drug companies, and device makers. That would save billions. But then you wouldn't have any of the product you are wanting to deliver to the people. How do you cut what you want to expend on something and then at the same time expect to receive more of it?

There are areas in healthcare where things could be done more efficiently. Insurance companies for one. They profit collectively in the billions each year yet don't really provide a product. They are the middlemen between you and your doctor/hospital. How do you make a profit if you don't provide a service or product? Some people think an electronic medical record would help with inefficiencies. Maybe in theory but the start up cost for an integrated record would be astounding. And it may or may not save much money at all. The tort business is a big one too. Huge ineffeciency there too but too many people feeding in that trough. Plantiffs, defense and the insurance companies butter their bread on that one.

[batonrougesooner]

Why not? Its cheap and readily avialable. And they don't have wasteful energy consuming medical devices like CAT scan machines to worry people with.

That's true. The cheapest way to provide healthcare is to not provide it.

[JohnnyMack]

I see healthcare as costing X. It costs X dollars every year in the United States for everyone who visits any kind of medical office/facility to be taken care of. I don't see how offering healthcare to everyone via the US Govt is going to change the overall cost I call X. Am I wrong so far?

Right now if someone goes to an ER for say a broken leg and doesn't have insurance or the means to pay it the cost is passed on to those who can pay already (individuals or insurance companies) or the hospital reduces its influx of cash.

If we all had a govt. subsidized plan to fall back on it would SEEM that we should see a reduction in the amount charged by both the hospital and our insurance company since the hospital would be receiving cash from this new USGov Insurance Plan. Right? So our individual tax burden is likely to increase and theoretically our insurance premiums would decrease. I'm still trying to figure out if our overall financial burden would be altered by a government run insurance program.

[adoniijahsooner]

you have some valid points; but if obama tries to fix any of the other issues it is still coming out of our pockets. the more i talk about this stuff the more i think were in a mess.

[JohnnyMack]

I guess it would in the sense that a lot of us receive our insurance from our employers as part of our compensation and that isn't taxed right now, so I suppose we would be impacted negatively by this Govt. plan. Right?

[oumartin]

I hate to say it but I agree with you JM.

I'm not saying it can't work and won't work but if you look around at other countries with socialized healthcare it isn't very beneficial for those seeking medical treatment.

My whole concern about all of this is the amount of money being spent right now for all these bailouts and whatnots can we afford to spend all this money on healthcare? Would a few more years of what they call a "broken system" hurt us?

My whole problem with all this spending is I am afraid America is going to continue to lose jobs and I'm going to continue to pay a gradual increase in taxes up to the point where I would be better off on welfare. I am afraid that soon I will not have the luxury of putting money into a retirement fund and be able to help my children get further in life than myself by continuing their education past high school.

This all costs money and I'm scared to death if we keep going down this road I either won't have a job or I won't have enough money to support a family on.

Everyday you see a few billion here and a few billion there. Well its gotta come from some where and I'm pretty sure it's gonna come outta my paycheck.

[soonerhubs]

I was listening to a program on NPR in which a guest "expert" suggested that all health care providers switch to non-profit and put doctors on salaries versus the current for profit fee for services model. His argument was that cutting out the need to high bid (aim high; over bid) [I can't think of the phrase] the insurance companies while negotiating would decrease costs.

I'm a simpleton when it comes to this topic, but I hesitate to rush things through. I would suggest the need to learn from Bush's mistakes, not repeat them.

[soonerscuba]

I see healthcare as costing X. It costs X dollars every year in the United States for everyone who visits any kind of medical office/facility to be taken care of. I don't see how offering healthcare to everyone via the US Govt is going to change the overall cost I call X. Am I wrong so far?

Right now if someone goes to an ER for say a broken leg and doesn't have insurance or the means to pay it the cost is passed on to those who can pay already (individuals or insurance companies) or the hospital reduces its influx of cash.

If we all had a govt. subsidized plan to fall back on it would SEEM that we should see a reduction in the amount charged by both the hospital and our insurance company since the hospital would be receiving cash from this new USGov Insurance Plan. Right? So our individual tax burden is likely to increase and theoretically our insurance premiums would decrease. I'm still trying to figure out if our overall financial burden would be altered by a government run insurance program.This is all highly dependent on the quality of the gov't plan. I think a public/private mix with an expectation that there is some class of patient to doctor fee could save a lot of money because of lower administrative costs. Also, if the gov't plan is effective it puts itself into a position to bargain collectively with pharmaceutical companies, and that is where the real savings are. I have doubts about a national healthcare system in this country simply because of the social contract with ourselves, in every country that national systems are effective there is a solidarity among people that it is the job of the healthy to care for the sick, good or bad that simply doesn't exist in this country.

[soonerscuba]

I'm a simpleton when it comes to this topic, but I hesitate to rush things through. I would suggest the need to learn from Bush's mistakes, not repeat them.The job of legislators is to legislate. I wouldn't worry too much, the Senate will pump the breaks.

[yermom]

:pop:

So far the thread's initial question has not been answered.


So far I haven't read a good reason for needing this crap pushed through in such an expedient manner.

to push the other crap inside it that no one is talking about ;)

there's no need to read anything, we are in a crisis!

[1890MilesToNorman]

The job of the legislature is to separate you from your money, property and liberty.

[Chuck Bao]

I think health care should be a priority of this administration.

The reason is simple – current high health care expenses are costing the economy and costing jobs. The system is broken and the longer that we delay in fixing it, the more damage it will do. Higher health care costs are clearly a factor in US jobs being outsourced overseas.

While I was in the US, I asked my fellow Oklahomans whether they should be more afraid of a terrorist attack killing or maiming friends/family or being denied life saving health care. Okay, nobody answered that question. They are all thinking that if we just keep everything the same, then they’re covered. The problem is that it won’t stay the same. It is getting worse day-by-day and there will be a point that the uncovered can’t be picked up by the system.

I did have a long discussion with my family doctor, as he wrapped my leg up for a motorcycle burn after hours at his clinic. I was telling him about the excellent health care in Thailand that is one-third of the cost in the US and that US and international pharmaceutical companies heavily discount the prices of their drugs sold overseas. He agreed and said that these companies are making their profits from the US system and will continue to do so until someone stops them. Free market forces at work, indeed.

His biggest gripe, however, was about the lawsuits and potential lawsuits that force US doctors to perform unnecessary tests and prescribe unnecessary drugs. I can’t argue with that, but I don’t think it is fair to lay all of the blame on the Democratic party.

Those arguing for healthier living also puzzle me. If I didn’t know better, I’d think you’re all one of those healthy living / liberal nuts in California. I want the right to smoke and drink and not come home at all. And, I’m gonna ride my bike without a helmet.

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness - yes, I know that is from the Declaration of Independence and not the Constitution. Health isn’t even mentioned, but how can you have Life and Pursuit of Happiness without health? Obviously, I’m bigger on the Liberty part. Anyway, our priorities seem to have been jumbled up under the previous administration and I’m glad that we are starting public discourse for such a key issue.

[homerSimpsonsBrain]

To answer the original question, the admin knows that once we get into the mid term election cycle (starts next year), there wont be any meaningful legislation passed. Too close to the election for anyone (dems or pubs) to take a chance on doing any real work. They need to campaign and make sure their voting record is non-controversial.

To JM's point about spending X on health care: The ER trip for a broken leg might cost the same but the uninsured guy that goes to the ER today for the flu gets the worst service and the highest priced health care. He doesnt care because he's not gonna pay. We should care cuz we are going to pay. Dont know if Obama-Care is gonna work but they're gonna need to do something

[OklahomaRed]

The democrats (like the republicans) just care about paying their legions. Everyone in the middle gets scr*wed going both ways. (Not the kind of scre*wing I like).

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,532663,00.html

[StoopTroup]

Wait on this massive healthcare reform?
600 Billion!!!

If this administration is so confident and so full of themselves can't they wait until their next terms? The system has been this way for years. Why not wait a couple more years. Why not work on the deficit and unemployment?

The only thing good I have seen out of this administration is they damn sure know how to spend money this country doesn't have.

I dont claim to be half as intelligent as all of you geniuses but everytime I watch or read any news there is some number with the word billion behind it in the headlines.

Your not simple....

Simpleton...now your onto something.

[jkjsooner]

Chuck mentioned some really good things. Whether or not we move to government healthcare, the current system is broken and is getting worse by the day.

1. We need to demand a more fair cost for drugs. Drug companies do need to cover R&D but that needs to be shared. We keep hearing we're in a global marketplace. If we are to compete we have to be playing on a level playing field.

2. In addition to tort reform, many doctors complain that the overhead (paperwork, etc) of using the multitude insurance companies is killing their productivity.

3. Our current system is already putting a lot of pressure on companies to outsource. I think we'll be forced to reevaluate our healthcare system when major companies start cutting their healthcare plans.

I had a friend who was in the Philippines recently. He contracted a very serious case of the flu that required hospitalization for three days. He said his care was great and it cost about $200. What would that be in the U.S.? Probably $20k.

I understand things are always going to be more expensive here but it should never be by a factor of 100. Our system is ridiculous and broken.

Maybe we're overtraining our doctors. Maybe we need more physicians assistants and the like who aren't saddled with $200k in debt by the time they actually start practicing.

[tommieharris91]

So companies will cut back their workforces and you won't see another pay raise in your lifetime so they can cover these new costs?

No, no, no. You'll see another pay raise, it's all just gonna go to Comrade Sam.

[OklahomaTuba]

They are all thinking that if we just keep everything the same, then they’re covered. The problem is that it won’t stay the same. It is getting worse day-by-day and there will be a point that the uncovered can’t be picked up by the system.
Try that link about the Native American health care system here and see how government healthcare worked out for those folks.

They might as well have gone to walmart.

Anyone that really believes a Government takeover of the health care industry will improve things, make it less expensive or give you better care is delusional.

NOTHING the government takes over improves or is efficient, it just makes things worse and makes it more political and more bureaucratic. The Indian Health Care system is one of many examples of this.

[oumartin]

Doesn't Chuck live in some foreign land? If you don't live here your opinion isn't worth a poop

[yermom]

except that he's experienced both and is from here

wouldn't you rather hear from someone with experience living there than just speculation from someone who's never actually been a part of a system other than ours?

and comparing a national system to the VA or the Indian system isn't really fair. is there going to be a government hospital which will be the only place you can get care?

[oumartin]

Nope, don't wanna hear from him.

The current system has worked as far back as I can remember. no need to change it.

Nope
Nope
Nope

[Sooner_Havok]

except that he's experienced both and is from here

wouldn't you rather hear from someone with experience living there than just speculation from someone who's never actually been a part of a system other than ours?

and comparing a national system to the VA or the Indian system isn't really fair. is there going to be a government hospital which will be the only place you can get care?

Speculation is just as good.

[Sooner_Havok]

Heh, current system is great. Since I work for OU, I get great benefits; the health insurance is pretty damned good. Any guesses then why I have been filling my prescriptions but not taking the pills for the last 3 months?

I am leaving my job to go to Law School. That means I can't have a full time job. That means I can't afford to spend huge amounts for health insurance. And since my pills are $400 for a 3 month supply, I certainly can't afford to buy them without insurance. So, I am stock piling my pills.

Great system.

[Curly Bill]

Heh, current system is great. Since I work for OU, I get great benefits; the health insurance is pretty damned good. Any guesses then why I have been filling my prescriptions but not taking the pills for the last 3 months?

I am leaving my job to go to Law School. That means I can't have a full time job. That means I can't afford to spend huge amounts for health insurance. And since my pills are $400 for a 3 month supply, I certainly can't afford to buy them without insurance. So, I am stock piling my pills.

Great system.

You're the one thinks going back to school is a good idea. Deal with the consequences. :P

[Sooner_Havok]

You're the one thinks going back to school is a good idea. Deal with the consequences. :P

I am. I'm stock piling pills at a higher rate than NRA folks are stock piling ammo. ;)

[yermom]

can't you get cheap insurance while going to school?

[Curly Bill]

I am, I am stock piling pills at a higher rate than NRA folks are stock piling ammo. ;)

Well, now that ya put it like that, I'm with ya. ;)

[JLEW1818]

3.5 years left

[Curly Bill]

3.5 years left

It gets better next November though. Just hang in there. :P

[Sooner_Havok]

can't you get cheap insurance while going to school?

Relatively cheap, about $150 a month (OU is throwing down $380 a month right now on my medical, so $150 is a hell of a bargain.) Going to be a lot for me for a while though. They don't want you to have a job for the first year.

[Curly Bill]

Relatively cheap, about $150 a month (OU is throwing down $380 a month right now on my medical, so $150 is a hell of a bargain.) Going to be a lot for me for a while though. They don't want you to have a job for the first year.

Just don't get sick ya dumas. :D

[Sooner_Havok]

Just don't get sick ya dumas. :D

Yeah, I tried that last time. Wound up tearing a tendon during PT :mad:

On the bright side, it got me out of lame *** Air Force rules Ultimate Frisbee the rest of the year.

[Curly Bill]

Why does it not surprise me the Air Force would play ultimate frisbee?

[Curly Bill]

Almost forgot:

Navy > Air Force

Army > Air Force

Marines > Air Force

Coast Guard = Air Force

[Sooner_Havok]

We weren't allowed to jump. WTF MAN???

[StoopTroup]

Heh, current system is great. Since I work for OU, I get great benefits; the health insurance is pretty damned good. Any guesses then why I have been filling my prescriptions but not taking the pills for the last 3 months?

I am leaving my job to go to Law School. That means I can't have a full time job. That means I can't afford to spend huge amounts for health insurance. And since my pills are $400 for a 3 month supply, I certainly can't afford to buy them without insurance. So, I am stock piling my pills.

Great system.

It's heart warming to know that your committing insurance fraud on your way to being a lawyer.

You should do well in that field.

[Curly Bill]

Like we need another lawyer anyway. ;)

[Sooner_Havok]

It's heart warming to know that your committing insurance fraud on your way to being a lawyer.

You should do well in that field.

Gotta do what you gotta do in our perfect, needs no changes, system.

[StoopTroup]

Gotta do what you gotta do in our perfect, needs no changes, system.

Your right....most of us would do the same thing.

Good Luck with School.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Tuba I think the pathetic thing about your worldview is your honest belief that your side is right and the other side is wrong. On every, single, issue. Your inability to see that both administrations are pieces of crap is what hamstrings you.The democrat politicians are, and long have been, simply power-crazed elitist criminals, with no regard for the laws and culture of our country. The republicans have some bad apples, but only in that party is there any hope for American constitutional govt. as designed by our founders. The democrat party is now only a bunch of outlaws, unfortunately for all of us. it's getting rough out there.

[Sooner_Havok]

Good Luck with School.

Thanks, I have a feeling I will need it. I just keep thinking if some of the people I know that graduated from Law School can do it, I shouldn't have a problem.

[oumartin]

RLIMC rocks!!!!

[Sooner_Havok]

RLIMC smokes rocks!!!!

fixed that fer ya

[GottaHavePride]

The democrat politicians are, and long have been, simply power-crazed elitist criminals, with no regard for the laws and culture of our country. The republicans have some bad apples, but only in that party is there any hope for American constitutional govt. as designed by our founders. The democrat party is now only a bunch of outlaws, unfortunately for all of us. it's getting rough out there.

You can swap places of the words "democrat" and "republican" in that paragraph and make an equally valid argument.

ALL career politicians are full of crap. They're out to make a living. Or they're in it because they like being in charge. Whatever. Finding a politician that actually gives a **** what his constituents think (other than for purposes of pandering to them to ensure re-election) is a rare, rare event.

Am I cynical? You betcha. Am I right? Well, I'm a hell of a lot more right than anyone thinking EITHER political party is the "answer" to any of our problems.

[Sooner_Havok]

Am I right?

yes

[Tiptonsooner]

You can swap places of the words "democrat" and "republican" in that paragraph and make an equally valid argument.

ALL career politicians are full of crap. They're out to make a living. Or they're in it because they like being in charge. Whatever. Finding a politician that actually gives a **** what his constituents think (other than for purposes of pandering to them to ensure re-election) is a rare, rare event.

Am I cynical? You betcha. Am I right? Well, I'm a hell of a lot more right than anyone thinking EITHER political party is the "answer" to any of our problems.

THIS^^^^^

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

You can swap places of the words "democrat" and "republican" in that paragraph and make an equally valid argument.

BULLSH*T!..and you damn sure know it!

[yermom]

i'm still not sure why anyone near a bank or Cheney in the last 10-15 years isn't in jail

[Harry Beanbag]

i'm still not sure why anyone near Washington DC in the last 10-15 years isn't in jail

fixed

[yermom]

what if i was only visiting? :O

[The Remnant]

The people are quickly finding out that change is not identical to reform.

[stoopified]

Wishful thinking. in order for the republicans to regain control, they need effective policies as well. The whole political system needs to thrown in the toilet.You obviously have no clue about politics.To get elected you don't need answers.Ypu simply need to point out all the problems that currently exist and blame them on the incumbent official or party.You then make pie-in-the -sky promises ( most of which you KNOW you can't keep) and you get elected.

[Sooner_Havok]

BULLSH*T!..and you damn sure know it!

Wow, you truly believe that the republican party is the one true path to salvation for this country and the world don't you.

I thought you where just acting like an extreme right-wing caricature for laughs. That is incredibly sad. What has our country become? :(

[Bourbon St Sooner]

I see healthcare as costing X. It costs X dollars every year in the United States for everyone who visits any kind of medical office/facility to be taken care of. I don't see how offering healthcare to everyone via the US Govt is going to change the overall cost I call X. Am I wrong so far?



You're exactly right. The way you control cost is have a bureaucrat figure out that we're only paying for 5,000 heart bypass surgeries this year. If your number 5,001, tough ****. Hopefully you can survive until next year. This is the way health care rationing is done in every other national system.

[Sooner_Havok]

You're exactly right. The way you control cost is have a bureaucrat figure out that we're only paying for 5,000 heart bypass surgeries this year. If your number 5,001, tough ****. Hopefully you can survive until next year. This is the way health care rationing is done in every other national system.

Does it have to be done that way in an American system? Do the rules of health care reform state that we cannot come up with our own system that suits our needs? Serious Question.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the mandatory enrollment you speak of (the 8% penalty) off the table now? I could have sworn Rahm Emmanuel had a meeting last week with some members of Congress and that got pulled (which it should have).

Not according to the NY Times or Post which had a graphic showing how much money you would lose with ObamaCare...8% was in there and showed as a penalty to a SB owner and a person not chosing healthcare.

EDIT: here's the story...Linky (http://www.nypost.com/seven/07162009/news/regionalnews/dem_health_rx_a_poion_pill_in_ny_179525.htm)

[TheHumanAlphabet]

You're exactly right. The way you control cost is have a bureaucrat figure out that we're only paying for 5,000 heart bypass surgeries this year. If your number 5,001, tough ****. Hopefully you can survive until next year. This is the way health care rationing is done in every other national system.

And rationed it will become. Ask the UK or Canada. Both countries have private payer systems as well, only you pay first to see a Gubment GP ( in the UK - takes a couple weeks or stand in line at the beginning of each day to see if you get in) and they then say its x weeks to do something and go on your own to see a private Dr. Something like that...

[JohnnyMack]

Another thing I have a problem with is the notion that the Govt. is somehow trying to take over healthcare and that it wants to force everyone into its system. Some (granted its mostly those prone to hyperbole and drama) are acting like if healthcare reform comes down the hill from Washington that every hospital will pull down their signs and be renamed "Gubmint Hospital No. 34525". While the US Government entering the field as insurers will increase competition I'm not prone to think it signals the death knell for healthcare as we know it.*

*If your name is Tuba or Bill Favor this is where you interject that I shouldn't underestimate the all powerful squanderer-in-chief or Barry Soretoreo to walk across water and enslave us into his socialistic reeducation camps.

At the end of all this I think that underestimating the strength of the medical/insurance lobby is a big mistake. Combine that with a Republican arm of Congress that would challenge Obama if he wanted to proclaim the earth round and the Blue Dog Democrats already coming out against the preliminary proposal and I think this healthcare reform is in real trouble. I mean as few as fifteen years ago the wildly popular Clinton administration got its *** handed to them when they tried to reform healthcare. The insurance and medical lobbies proved too powerful then and I don't think we're at a point where these lobbies have lost any influence. I predict that while we may see some changes to the structure of healthcare that we won't see any sweeping overhaul. Big business still runs the show in this country and they won't go down without a fight. They don't want increased competition and they're about to (as they did in 94) come after this plan and tear it to pieces like a pack of wild dogs. I predict that Obama ends up losing this fight in a decision to the craftier and more resourceful big business.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Does it have to be done that way in an American system? Do the rules of health care reform state that we cannot come up with our own system that suits our needs? Serious Question.

I think there's a better way but, unfortunately, we currently have only one proposal being shoved down our throats. There's been no true debate and exchange of ideas.

If it comes down to nationalized health care, the gov't will ration it. There's no other way. Health care is not an unlimited good. When you start offering "free health care" (there's no such thing, btw), rationing will occur to keep the bill down. And then look for shortages because fewer people will enter med school, because the gov't is going to low ball payouts. And what's the incentive to go through 4 years of med school and however many years of residency to get paid nothing?

[Sooner_Havok]

Please answer me this question. Why is it that to counter the calls for a national health care system, you always point out the ways things are in other countries? You act like there is no possible way to set up a national health care system except the way other countries have done it. Well, I ask you again, why must it be done that way? Is there some kind of unwritten rule that states no other systems can be tried or implemented?

You say it would suck here cause it sucks in Canada. Well guess what, football sucks in Canada too, it's a lot better down here. The same idea implemented in a different way will not necessarily yield the same results. I think a lot of people fail to recognize that.

[JohnnyMack]

Please answer me this question. Why is it that to counter the calls for a national health care system, you always point out the ways things are in other countries? You act like there is no possible way to set up a national health care system except the way other countries have done it. Well, I ask you again, why must it be done that way? Is there some kind of unwritten rule that states no other systems can be tried or implemented?

You say it would suck here cause it sucks in Canada. Well guess what, football sucks in Canada too, it's a lot better down here. The same idea implemented in a different way will not necessarily yield the same results. I think a lot of people fail to recognize that.

I take it you don't listen to much right wing radio? I have XM in my car now and listen to Hannity, Beck et al all the time now for amusement and what you hear our right wing friends around here parrot are these exact sentiments.

[Sooner_Havok]

I think there's a better way but, unfortunately, we currently have only one proposal being shoved down our throats. There's been no true debate and exchange of ideas.

If it comes down to nationalized health care, the gov't will ration it. There's no other way. Health care is not an unlimited good. When you start offering "free health care" (there's no such thing, btw), rationing will occur to keep the bill down. And then look for shortages because fewer people will enter med school, because the gov't is going to low ball payouts. And what's the incentive to go through 4 years of med school and however many years of residency to get paid nothing?

Ok, but if the government plan sucks, then wouldn't the people that can afford health care right now, who would still have their health care under "Obamacare" be able to say "Na, I am sticking with Blue Cross, see ya chumps" and go to his normal doctor?

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Another thing I have a problem with is the notion that the Govt. is somehow trying to take over healthcare and that it wants to force everyone into its system. Some (granted its mostly those prone to hyperbole and drama) are acting like if healthcare reform comes down the hill from Washington that every hospital will pull down their signs and be renamed "Gubmint Hospital No. 34525". While the US Government entering the field as insurers will increase competition I'm not prone to think it signals the death knell for healthcare as we know it.*


I disagree. That gov't health insurance is going to be subsidized. Why would it cost $1 trillion if they weren't subsidizing it. That means it going to be lower than market value so why would people buy from a private insurer. The other thing is that that 8% tax on employers is probably less than what most companies pay now for their private insurance. So their incentive is to drop their plan and pay the 8%, forcing their employees to go to the gov't plan.

It's not going to happen overnight, but over 5 to 10 years we will have only one payer.

[Sooner_Havok]

I take it you don't listen to much right wing radio? I have XM in my car now and listen to Hannity, Beck et al all the time now for amusement and what you hear our right wing friends around here parrot are these exact sentiments.

To be honest, I use my Sirius to listen to NPR, BBC, and the rock channels that don't play whinny arse "I hate my parents" music.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Ok, but if the government plan sucks, then wouldn't the people that can afford health care right now, who would still have their health care under "Obamacare" be able to say "Na, I am sticking with Blue Cross, see ya chumps" and go to his normal doctor?

See my post above about the subsidized gov't health care plan.

[Sooner_Havok]

That means it going to be lower than market value so why would people buy from a private insurer.

Cause they think the national system sucks balls

somewhere around 48% of the nation is going to feel that way initially.

[ndpruitt03]

The thing that's bad about all this is that we wouldn't be so bad off if it weren't for the bailouts that started under Bush and continued at an alarming rate under Obama. These bailouts are stupid. If companies are going bankrupt let them go bankrupt. I don't see any reason for bailing out GM or all these banks. It's what made our economy go down and spending all this money is just making it even worse. A trillion dollars on health care is going to be even worse because smaller companies will have to subsidize because they won't be able to pay for health care for all their employees. Small business will bite the dust when Obamanomics is done.

[Curly Bill]

You say it would suck here cause it sucks in Canada.

It would mostly suck here because that's what government does, it sucks, and you can bet that no matter how you portray health care reform, the govt. is going have too big of a role.

[Sooner_Havok]

It would mostly suck here because that's what government does, it sucks, and you can bet that no matter how you portray health care reform, the govt. is going have too big of a role.

Everyone always says name one thing the government does that the private sector doesn't do better. I thought of two.

[Curly Bill]

Everyone always says name one thing the government does that the private sector doesn't do better. I thought of two.

You like big government, I'm surprised you only came up with two.

[Sooner_Havok]

You like big government, I'm surprised you only came up with two.

Well, I thought I had two. But I only have one.

I was thinking waste money, but the banks and other "to big to fail" companies proved that one wrong.

Would have said screw people over, but again, the banks and other "to big to fail" companies proved that one wrong.

Thought about maybe saying giving incompetent jerk-offs a job, but, well you get where I am going.


So pretty much, the government is good at killing people. That's it. Makes sense that if they are good at killing people, they might be good at not killing people. Right?

[Curly Bill]

Well, I thought I had two. But I only have one.

I was thinking waste money, but the banks and other "to big to fail" companies proved that one wrong.

Would have said screw people over, but again, the banks and other "to big to fail" companies proved that one wrong.

Thought about maybe saying giving incompetent jerk-offs a job, but, well you get where I am going.


So pretty much, the government is good at killing people. That's it. Makes sense that if they are good at killing people, they might be good at not killing people. Right?

Wrong! Anything that can be screwed up, the government will screw it up more than anyone thought possible.

[Sooner_Havok]

Wrong! Anything that can be screwed up, the government will screw it up more than anyone thought possible.

I don't know, they seem to be pretty good at the killing people thing. I mean, you never here about the air strike where no one was killed. :D

[OklahomaTuba]

If this is true, God help us all...

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=332548165656854

[Curly Bill]

Our ability to kill people is highly overrated.

[Sooner_Havok]

Our ability to kill people is highly overrated.

Huh, I thought we had the best military in the world.

[Curly Bill]

Huh, I thought we had the best military in the world.

We do, but still...it ain't perfect.

[Sooner_Havok]

We do, but still...it ain't perfect.

So, is Blackwater better than the USMC?

[Curly Bill]

So, is Blackwater better than the USMC?

They're likely more efficient.

[Sooner_Havok]

They're likely more efficient.

So they are better at what they do than the Marines are?

[Curly Bill]

So they are better at what they do than the Marines are?

I'm not familiar enough with them to say for sure, but I would say that a well-trained, well-equipped, private sercurity firm would be superior to an equal # of US military types.

* Special Forces US military types being a likely exception.

[Sooner_Havok]

I'm not familiar enough with them to say for sure, but I would say that a well-trained, well-equipped, private sercurity firm would be superior to an equal # of US military types.

* Special Forces US military types being a likely exception.

Interesting. I think I know a few jarheads that might respectfully disagree with that.

[Curly Bill]

Interesting. I think I know a few jarheads that might respectfully disagree with that.

I worked with some jarheads back in the day, I'm sure they would. ;)

[Curly Bill]

The thing is, if you took a small number of private guys and trained them really well, equipped them really well, you could have a small but elite force. What does that sound like? It sounds like the US military's special forces.

The mass of US Military peeps are not going to be trained to that utmost degree.

[Sooner_Havok]

The thing is, if you took a small number of private guys and trained them really well, equipped them really well, you could have a small but elite force. What does that sound like? It sounds like the US military's special forces.

The mass of US Military peeps are not going to be trained to that utmost degree.

But most of those guys are former military. So if special forces are better than private groups like blackwater, what does that say?

[Curly Bill]

But most of those guys are former military. So if special forces are better than private groups like blackwater, what does that say?

Special forces are the cream of the crop, and the military can absolutely turn them into the best killing machines in the world. We have the best military in the world, but the great majority of US military folks aren't even close to being the same thing that a Seal, a Green Beret or a Ranger is.

[Sooner_Havok]

Special forces are the cream of the crop, and the military can absolutely turn them into the best killing machines in the world. We have the best military in the world, but the great majority of US military folks aren't even close to being the same thing that a Seal, a Green Beret or a Ranger is.

But Blackwater folks are just Special Forces rejects then. So the US government cranks out the best killing machines in the world.

On a side note, a marine buddy of mine once said it takes 100 army soldiers to generate the same effect as 10 marines. Them boys are pretty proud of themselves and what they do.

[Curly Bill]

But Blackwater folks are just Special Forces rejects then. So the US government cranks out the best killing machines in the world.

On a side note, a marine buddy of mine once said it takes 100 army soldiers to generate the same effect as 10 marines. Them boys are pretty proud of themselves and what they do.

I would imagine a lot of the Blackwater (and the like) folks are guys who can work for one of those private companies making a lot more $$$ than they can for Uncle Sam, to say they are rejects I believe would be wrong. Many of them are ex Seals, Rangers, etc...who quit the military to make more money.

...and the Marines are great, but ain't no 10 of them gonna do the same as 100 Army dudes.

[Sooner_Havok]

...and the Marines are great, but ain't no 10 of them gonna do the same as 100 Army dudes.

Don't tell them that :D

[Curly Bill]

Don't tell them that :D

Like I said: I used to work with them, I loved telling them stuff like that. Oh, and that they were just a department of the Navy. ;) Of course they'd object to that, but what did it say at the top of their paychecks? United States Navy -- I liked pointing that out to them too. :D

[Octavian]

I mean as few as fifteen years ago the wildly popular Clinton administration got its *** handed to them when they tried to reform healthcare. The insurance and medical lobbies proved too powerful then and I don't think we're at a point where these lobbies have lost any influence.


The Clinton Admn. wasn't really that popular in his first term. WJC became much more popular after the '94 fiasco, the subsequent economic boom, and in his second term -- where he remained popular despite the mind-numbing impeachment.


The '93 HC reform push is the prime example. The insurance and medical lobbies get way too much credit for defeating HillaryCare. All of those powerful legislators didn't simply vote to kill the proposals because of special interest groups...the vast majority of the American people looked it over and said "no thanks." People in those legislators' districts overwhelmingly pressed them and told them to vote NO -- and told them if they didn't, they were out. Of course, after they (including many Democrats) voted against it, the people back home voted them out a year later anyway.


Some of the particulars in the UHC plan have changed somewhat since '93....but the overarching goal and the result is still the same. The main difference between now and then is that now the D's DO have a wildly popular POTUS and a Super Majority in Congress. Of course the free market industries are still against it -- and its looking more and more like the people are beginning to arrive at the same conclusion again, which is:



"I love the idea of universal health insurance for everyone. I detest what must be done to me and my family to achieve it."



Then, as now -- it's taking a lot more than special interest groups and greedy corporations to block this. And it sure isn't the GOP -- they don't have to votes to do anything. The only reason this hasn't already passed in its current form is because a boat load of Democrats know they'd be signing their own political death sentences....not because of lobbies in DC, because of voters back home.


Still, though, it may be watered down and passed in some other version than where it currently stands. With the numbers they have, the Dems should be able to pass something they want.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I think most politicians know this is their ONLY chance to install socialized medicine, and the entire democrat party is dedicated to getting it done. There will be both carrots and sticks given to democrat legislators, to ensure the passage. Even the prospect of losing the next election won't be enough to stop the train.(boy, do I ever hope i'm wrong!)

[Harry Beanbag]

Like I said: I used to work with them, I loved telling them stuff like that. Oh, and that they were just a department of the Navy. ;) Of course they'd object to that, but what did it say at the top of their paychecks? United States Navy -- I liked pointing that out to them too. :D

Yeah, the jarheads have a pretty good comeback for the Department of the Navy jab: the Men's Department. :)

[Curly Bill]

Yeah, the jarheads have a pretty good comeback for the Department of the Navy jab: the Men's Department. :)

You can bet that someone had to think of that for them. ;)

[Harry Beanbag]

You can bet that someone had to think of that for them. ;)


Yeah, I forgot to add those that can think as a disclaimer. :D