Dems Fear Town Hall Meetings

[Sofiyya 1,687]

The man Scott was addressing is a medical doctor who lives in his district.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

We've had millions of uninsured for a very long time. What's the big deal?

If people can't avail themselves of the opportunities available in this great country, that's their problem!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

You all need to find some middle ground . You people on this thread . need to find some balance give and take . CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG .

good reading

So where's your middle ground on health care reform? Are you opposed to providing health insurance to the millions of Americans who cannot afford private insurance?

We've had millions of uninsured for a very long time. What's the big deal?

So basically, you don't give a sh!t about those Americans, correct?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

You all need to find some middle ground . You people on this thread . need to find some balance give and take . CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG .

good reading

So where's your middle ground on health care reform? Are you opposed to providing health insurance to the millions of Americans who cannot afford private insurance?

We've had millions of uninsured for a very long time. What's the big deal?

So basically, you don't give a sh!t about those Americans, correct?

You shouldn't either. They are the kind of Americans who drag the rest of us down.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Actually, there are (at this time) FIVE versions of a health care bill, each with differing provisions, including one that explicitly rations health care for chronic illnesses and conditions, and allows the government to deduct money from private bank accounts. NO BILL OR GUARANTEE FROM THE PRESIDENT WILL ASSURE INDIVIDUAL OPTIONS. I hope I made that clear. For one thing, since most employees get ther health care thru their employers, they are hostage to choices that their employers make. if the government determines that they will tax that benefit, ad at this point, that is a consistant provision, employers may decide to drop the health care benefit.

My parents are on Medicare and they also choose to buy supplemental private insurance. How would a public option that is available to all Americans, not just seniors and the disabled, be any different?

Steven, have you read any one of the five versions, or are you relying on your favorite leftist bloggers to tell you what the fed's plans are for you and your folks?

Oh, so you aren't opposed to it on principal. You're just against the current proposals as you understand them because according to your understanding, they would make the public option different from Medicare and forbid Americans to purchase supplemental private insurance?

I am opposed to them on the principle that I embrace individual liberty, freedom, and abhore big government overstepping the bounds of its Constitutional limitations.

Does the USPS infringe on your individual liberty and freedom?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Apples and oranges, old man. Health care is a much more basic need than mail.

[G&R 0]

We've had millions of uninsured for a very long time. What's the big deal?

If people can't avail themselves of the opportunities available in this great country, that's their problem!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

You all need to find some middle ground . You people on this thread . need to find some balance give and take . CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG .

good reading

So where's your middle ground on health care reform? Are you opposed to providing health insurance to the millions of Americans who cannot afford private insurance?

We've had millions of uninsured for a very long time. What's the big deal?

So basically, you don't give a sh!t about those Americans, correct?

You shouldn't either. They are the kind of Americans who drag the rest of us down.

That's my point earlier. Whether you give a sh!t or not about the millions of uninsured, keeping them uninsured is having an adverse affect on those who are insured. We all have symbiotic relationship with one another...or I suppose some here think that relationship is parasitic.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Apples and oranges, old man. Health care is a much more basic need than mail.

He who posts the most analogies wins

You all need to find some middle ground . You people on this thread . need to find some balance give and take . CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG .

good reading

So where's your middle ground on health care reform? Are you opposed to providing health insurance to the millions of Americans who cannot afford private insurance?

We've had millions of uninsured for a very long time. What's the big deal?

So basically, you don't give a sh!t about those Americans, correct?

You shouldn't either. They are the kind of Americans who drag the rest of us down.

That's my point earlier. Whether you give a sh!t or not about the millions of uninsured, keeping them uninsured is having an adverse affect on those who are insured. We all have symbiotic relationship with one another...or I suppose some here think that relationship is parasitic.

Well... some people are (welfare) parasites. Obviously the issue here is that its easier to demonise people if you reduce them to the lowest common denominator.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Whether you give a sh!t or not about the millions of uninsured, keeping them uninsured is having an adverse affect on those who are insured. We all have symbiotic relationship with one another...or I suppose some here think that relationship is parasitic.

How is it symbiotic? They take, we give. That's the definition of parasitic.

As for adverse impact, that's only because we provide them with emergency care and pass on the cost to the insured through premiums. The solution is simple, don't treat them. No matter what. An uninsured young lady with twins in her womb comes to the hospital with bullet wounds, fuсk her. Let her bleed to the death on the sidewalk and charge her family for cleanup.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Whether you give a sh!t or not about the millions of uninsured, keeping them uninsured is having an adverse affect on those who are insured. We all have symbiotic relationship with one another...or I suppose some here think that relationship is parasitic.

How is it symbiotic? They take, we give. That's the definition of parasitic.

As for adverse impact, that's only because we provide them with emergency care and pass on the cost to the insured through premiums. The solution is simple, don't treat them. No matter what. An uninsured young lady with twins in her womb comes to the hospital with bullet wounds, fuсk her. Let her bleed to the death on the sidewalk and charge her family for cleanup.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Private Pike

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Exactly.

[G&R 0]

Whether you give a sh!t or not about the millions of uninsured, keeping them uninsured is having an adverse affect on those who are insured. We all have symbiotic relationship with one another...or I suppose some here think that relationship is parasitic.

How is it symbiotic? They take, we give. That's the definition of parasitic.

As for adverse impact, that's only because we provide them with emergency care and pass on the cost to the insured through premiums. The solution is simple, don't treat them. No matter what. An uninsured young lady with twins in her womb comes to the hospital with bullet wounds, fuсk her. Let her bleed to the death on the sidewalk and charge her family for cleanup.

Population control is very Green. uuumm good !

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Whether you give a sh!t or not about the millions of uninsured, keeping them uninsured is having an adverse affect on those who are insured. We all have symbiotic relationship with one another...or I suppose some here think that relationship is parasitic.

How is it symbiotic? They take, we give. That's the definition of parasitic.

As for adverse impact, that's only because we provide them with emergency care and pass on the cost to the insured through premiums. The solution is simple, don't treat them. No matter what. An uninsured young lady with twins in her womb comes to the hospital with bullet wounds, fuсk her. Let her bleed to the death on the sidewalk and charge her family for cleanup.

Population control is very Green. uuumm good !

You must not be Christian.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Actually, there are (at this time) FIVE versions of a health care bill, each with differing provisions, including one that explicitly rations health care for chronic illnesses and conditions, and allows the government to deduct money from private bank accounts. NO BILL OR GUARANTEE FROM THE PRESIDENT WILL ASSURE INDIVIDUAL OPTIONS. I hope I made that clear. For one thing, since most employees get ther health care thru their employers, they are hostage to choices that their employers make. if the government determines that they will tax that benefit, ad at this point, that is a consistant provision, employers may decide to drop the health care benefit.

My parents are on Medicare and they also choose to buy supplemental private insurance. How would a public option that is available to all Americans, not just seniors and the disabled, be any different?

Steven, have you read any one of the five versions, or are you relying on your favorite leftist bloggers to tell you what the fed's plans are for you and your folks?

Oh, so you aren't opposed to it on principal. You're just against the current proposals as you understand them because according to your understanding, they would make the public option different from Medicare and forbid Americans to purchase supplemental private insurance?

I am opposed to them on the principle that I embrace individual liberty, freedom, and abhore big government overstepping the bounds of its Constitutional limitations.

Does the USPS infringe on your individual liberty and freedom?

If my health care had the same problems as the USPS, yes, it would:

Financial Woes Continue to Haunt USPS

Mar 1, 2009 12:00 PM, By Larry Riggs

Despite the passage of postal reform legislation a little over two years ago, the U.S. Postal Service remains steeped in financial problems.

It's anybody's guess how much, if any, financial assistance the USPS will get from Congress — whether or not it's part of President Barack Obama's economic stimulus package.

The major issue continues to be how the postal service will cope with its nearly $5.8 billion annual obligation to pay healthcare costs for retired postal employees.

All this comes at a time when the USPS reported a loss of $384 million for the quarter ended Dec. 31, 2008 and projected that mail volume would fall even further, to some 12 billion to 15 billion pieces, for the year ending this Sept. 30.

Even with these losses, the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA) mandates that the USPS can raise rates every year — but only in accordance with the rate of inflation specified in the Consumer Price Index.

And so the postal service announced last month that standard mail and nonprofit rates will increase an average of 3.8% on May 11.

Catalog or flat rates will rise by 2.5%. But some standard hikes are going to exceed the average.

“It looks like standard rate parcels went up an average of 16%,” says Jerry Cerasale, the Direct Marketing Association's senior vice president for government affairs. “Our initial response is that it's just going to depress volume more.”

Under the new rate schedule:

Standard mail regular automation letters with five-digit ZIP codes that weigh 3.3 ounces or less will cost 23.3 cents to mail.

Standard mail regular automation letters with three-digit ZIPs will be priced at 25.1 cents.

In the standard mail regular nonautomation category, machinable automated area distribution center letters weighing 3 ounces or less will now cost 25.6 cents.

Meanwhile, the industry is hoping the USPS can remain solvent given its fiscal woes.

The PAEA allowed the postal service to file an “exigent (i.e., urgent) rate case” if the conventional CPI-based hike would leave it with insufficient operating funds.

But Postmaster General Jack Potter said in testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security in late January that the USPS doesn't believe it's “appropriate” to ask for an exigent rate case.

“This would be counterproductive, particularly in an environment where mailing activity is already severely contracted,” he testified.

Early last month, a coalition of 40 mailers and trade groups wrote a letter to National Economic Council director Lawrence Summers, Office of Management and Budget director Peter Orszag and OMG deputy director Robert Nabors, asking that any forthcoming stimulus bill include an amendment from Sen. Thomas Carper (D-DE) that would allow the USPS to pay retired postal employees out of a separate retiree health benefits fund and not from general postal revenue.

The letter argued that “The U.S. Postal Service confronts a severe economic challenge that, if not addressed in an effective way, could cause serious and disruptive changes to its structure and services, and the estimated 9 million jobs it supports throughout the mailing community. Because the Service remains an essential and fundamental part of the nation's communications and commerce infrastructure, and because of the vast network of jobs it supports, we believe that action must be taken swiftly. …This is vital legislation that will preserve or restore up to a million jobs in the mailing sector.”

Before the groups wrote that letter, Potter asked the Senate panel for changes in the law that would permit the postal service to cut back its delivery schedule to five days a week, and also requested assistance with the USPS' healthcare obligations. His proposal received, at best, a lukewarm response among the senators.

For the latest postal news, visit http://directmag.com/legal/postal/.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Sofiyya