Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,356 Year: 3,613/9,624 Month: 484/974 Week: 97/276 Day: 25/23 Hour: 3/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How Does Republican Platform Help Middle Class?
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 112 of 440 (610601)
03-31-2011 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Theodoric
03-31-2011 2:28 PM


Is there a way I can link to the above message and have the words "whine and complain" as the highlighted link? Like we can do with URL.
[url=www.link.com]text you want others to see[/url]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 2:28 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 2:49 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 119 of 440 (610611)
03-31-2011 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Taq
03-31-2011 3:06 PM


I don't really pay attention to politics... I don't consider myself a Republican, but I do fall on the right side of the political compass.
I think the most honest answer, from me, to your questions of how the Republicans help the middle class, is by keeping the other guys from hurting us.
They'd get the "not-them" vote.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Taq, posted 03-31-2011 3:06 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Taq, posted 03-31-2011 3:37 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 122 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-31-2011 3:43 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 126 of 440 (610636)
03-31-2011 5:17 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by Taq
03-31-2011 3:37 PM


So what are these policies, and what harm are they preventing?
I don't really know specific policies. I'll try to give you the jist of my thinking:
I've spent my life, through great effort, doing what I can to yield the best possible future I can acheive. I've done what I think are all the right things: get educated, don't break the law, find a good job, be responsible. I've waited to have any children and live modestly to avoid overspending. I've succeeded and gotten myself into a good spot.
Through all this, I've seen a lot of old friends and strangers drop out of school, get arrested, barely hold a job, have kids early, waste money on bullshit...
I have other friends who couldn't catch a break, had some bad luck, but have been trying nonetheless.
I'm willing to help other people, but they have to want to help themselves. Throwing money at people who aren't interested in bettering themselves doesn't help them at all, imho.
So, I do what I can to help my friends and aquaintences that I feel will actually benefit from the help. I don't throw money at people just because they are downtrodden, especially if I don't think it will help them.
I feel that the Democrats want to do more to get more to the less fortunate, but that they take all the choice in the matter out of my hands. I don't want to just throw my money in the general direction of the less fortunate. I like to have that decision myself as to who I'm helping because then I feel like I actually am helping.
Being near St. Louis, I get to compare two different states, Missouri the Red state, and Illinois the Blue state. If you go to the unemployment office in Missouri, they explain to you how you are going to have to be actively seeking employment and they want to see lists of companies and contacts that you're making in that search or your not going to get the benefits. If you go to the unemployment office in Illinois, they teach you how to fill out the forms in a way that it looks like your seeking employment, regardless of if you are or not, so that you can more easily receive the benefits.
I think that generally exemplifies the different approaches each side takes towards the whole thing.
I see the left's approach as not offering any incentive to putting in the great effort that I have towards setting myself up so that I can do this on my own without aid. Further, its seems that they are rewarding not putting the effort in by making it easier to get help if you didn't make it.
Not only do I dislike that approach, but I think it makes things worse off for everyone.
So the way the Republicans would be helping me is by stopping the Democrats from inadvertently making things worse.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Taq, posted 03-31-2011 3:37 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 5:29 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 129 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 5:41 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 134 by Rahvin, posted 03-31-2011 6:26 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 137 by Taq, posted 03-31-2011 6:57 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 127 of 440 (610638)
03-31-2011 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Dr Adequate
03-31-2011 3:43 PM


The boogieman argument in its most basic form.
So who are "the other guys"? "Death Panels"? "Communists"? The people who "hate America" and "want the terrorists to win"? The Evil "Stealth Muslim" in the White House? Who specifically is trying to hurt you?
I don't think anyone is specifically trying to hurt me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-31-2011 3:43 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-31-2011 7:25 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 130 of 440 (610644)
03-31-2011 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Theodoric
03-31-2011 5:29 PM


Any evidence for this assertion?
No, none at all. It was personal experience. Take it or leave it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 5:29 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 131 of 440 (610646)
03-31-2011 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by Theodoric
03-31-2011 5:41 PM


Just looked at both states websites. They both have a requirement that you keep a record of your work search.
Yes, they did. I didn't emply otherwise. Those were the forms I was talking about.
In Missouri, they come at with: "you better do this or else".
In Illinois, they show you the easiest way to get the benefits.
This also goes to the right wing myth that the unemployed are jsut lazy dead beats that don't want to work.
I also described two different types of "the unemployed".
You're just looking for anything that might be an error on my part. You're not constructively discussing. You're letting this lead you to misunderstandings. This is why I think your an idiot.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 5:41 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by fearandloathing, posted 03-31-2011 6:07 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 133 by hooah212002, posted 03-31-2011 6:13 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 136 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 6:34 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 360 of 440 (612763)
04-18-2011 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 356 by marc9000
04-17-2011 4:42 PM


Well I appreciate seeing fresh opinions here so thanks for sharing.
I'm a middle class property owner who's on the right side of the political spectrum, but I'm not sure I should call myself a Republican.
There's a lot that I disagree with you on, but some of it did make sense. I have a lot of catching up here before I can meaningfully reply... and by the time I get done, it'll prolly be closed

This message is a reply to:
 Message 356 by marc9000, posted 04-17-2011 4:42 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 366 by marc9000, posted 04-19-2011 8:53 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 377 of 440 (612933)
04-20-2011 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 366 by marc9000
04-19-2011 8:53 PM


Thanks. But fresh? Fresh for what, EvC forums, or the scientific community?
Fresh for here, at EvC.
My style of conservatism/tradition isn’t all that fresh in many places, it’s pretty common.
Sure. One thing about "conservatism/tradition", though, is that its bound to lose eventually. Things inevitably change.
I see the far left as being reckless with it, and the opposition on the far right as simply slowing them down and keeping it in check. I think that can be a good thing.
I suspect that the scientific community is largely in favor of government health care. Much more so than the general population. Why? — because it gets them closer to be able to play god.
Whatever.
I don’t think it’s important for anyone (who's not somehow involved in political party operations) to identify with a political party, as if that party dictates how they think.
Well, they are what this thread's about...
I've noticed that there is somewhat of a dichotomy in the population, where individuals do tend to think like one of the sides, and not so much like its been dictated to them how they think, but that they do think differently. I wonder is there's something with the whole urban/rural thing.
My opinions are based on what I know about U.S. and world history, how it shows past human reaction to certain situations. I look at U.S. foundings, quotes of its founders like Madison, and see how they square with the realities of current events, and history. Madison wasn’t necessarily a Republican, but of course he was nothing like today’s Democrats.
My problem with that approach is that there's a lot here today that they couldn't possibly have imagined. Not that that makes them worthless, or anything, but they are certainly not all encompasing.
I don’t know, so far admin has let us play all we want in this thread [furiously knocking on wood] - I hope it stays that way.
All we have to do is keep addressing the topic.
So how do you think the Republicans are helping the middle class?
From your posts is seems that you think they help by easing the burden of paying for social programs. Too, maybe keeping the federal government out of our lives?
So what else? Anything about fiscal policy or foreign affairs or anything?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 366 by marc9000, posted 04-19-2011 8:53 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 383 by marc9000, posted 04-20-2011 8:25 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 404 of 440 (613173)
04-22-2011 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 395 by ZenMonkey
04-21-2011 9:30 PM


side-question
I'm a medical massage therapist in private practice, and in my line of work I have to document medical necessity all the time. If I can't, then insurance won't pay for it, and my patient has to pay out of pocket.
Do they have to pay more when they have to pay out of pocket?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 395 by ZenMonkey, posted 04-21-2011 9:30 PM ZenMonkey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 405 by ZenMonkey, posted 04-22-2011 11:17 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 406 of 440 (613181)
04-22-2011 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 405 by ZenMonkey
04-22-2011 11:17 AM


Re: side-question
Of course they do.
Badly phrased, I meant: Do you charge more for the service?
For an hour session paid out of pocket, on the other hand, I charge $75.
For a typical plan, the patient pays a $25 copay and the insurance company pays me $25,
Do you still charge $75/hour for the service? How much do you charge the insurance company?

Background on me asking:
I was going to the same dentist forever back in the day, covered under my parents' insurance. After I graduated college, I was no longer covered and went to the dentist to pay out of pocket. He ended up changing me a lot less because I was paying out of pocket. The rational was this: he charges the insurance company for the service, and then they pay a portion of what he charges. For example (adjusted for easy math), let's say he needs to make $100 for a service. The insurance company pays 50% of what he charges them, so he charges them $200 for the service, they pay their portion and he gets his $100. When I went in to pay out of pocket, he just charged me the $100 that he needed to make and that was that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 405 by ZenMonkey, posted 04-22-2011 11:17 AM ZenMonkey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 407 by crashfrog, posted 04-22-2011 11:48 AM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 409 by ZenMonkey, posted 04-22-2011 12:29 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 408 of 440 (613187)
04-22-2011 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 407 by crashfrog
04-22-2011 11:48 AM


Re: side-question
Most insurance companies follow the Medicare model and pay a predetermined amount for medical services; medical service providers have to submit a bill coded with the insurance company's proprietary billing codes for procedures. For instance, if a hospital bills for a laparoscopic surgery, there's an associated billing code for "laparoscopic surgery to the knee" or whatever, and associated codes for the materials used up in the surgery (dressings, bandages, anesthetic, etc.)
Basically the insurance company uses its monopsony power to say "we'll pay you exactly $8000 for billing code LPS-12 (a laparoscopic surgery to the knee), or you can fuck off and not accept patients on our insurance. Since that's about 30% of the people who live and work here in your county, that would be a pretty stupid thing to do." Medicare does the same thing. It's a powerful means of health care cost control, of course, doctors hate it.
I've seen those TV commercials for various types of educations to get jobs where one of them is "Medical Billing and Coding". In the back of my mind I always wondered just why that would require going to one of those schools....
And, of course, when it's just you and your wallet, you have no bargaining power at all, so the doctor can charge you more to make up for insurance and Medicare paying him less.
That's kinda shitty.
And of course, since each insurer has it's own incompatible system of billing codes - one code for each possible medical procedure, medication, and consumable - so perhaps a hundred thousand codes per insurer, plus the Medicare billing code system, plus a Medicaid billing system (one per state.) Now you can see why billing is more than 50% of the administrative costs, on average, of any health care provider, and why moving to single-payer (and therefore a single unified billing system) stands to reap such an enormous increase in efficiency.
Yeah, there certainly are some things that would be better.
Thanks for the reply.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 407 by crashfrog, posted 04-22-2011 11:48 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 410 by crashfrog, posted 04-22-2011 5:30 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024