Jeff Stahler by Jeff Stahler

Jeff Stahler

Comments (31) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. rpmurray

    rpmurray said, about 1 year ago

    A new government bureaucracy with highly paid unelected officials is the answer.

  2. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, about 1 year ago

    The new and improved budget just agreed on by Congressional leaders and Obama will slash the cost of Medicare. Why waste money on old, retired people who are no longer contributing to society and are better off dead?


    And don’t worry: most ACA plans are HMOs, so you won’t have to worry about bills for any of those services, because you won’t be getting any of them.


    (And you won’t be worried, since HMO doctors, unlike fee-for-service doctors, won’t say, ‘You need this or you’ll die, so how will you pay for it?’ They won’t say anything, so you won’t have to worry.)

  3. Enoki

    Enoki said, about 1 year ago

    Well then, the ACA is for you! No access due to a crappy website and high priced insurance you can never afford!

  4. kea

    kea said, about 1 year ago

    Right on. …and make it all non-profit.

  5. lonecat

    lonecat said, about 1 year ago

    The woman in the cartoon says, “I wish lack of access to health care was our problem.” I say, “No, you don’t, unless you have no imagination at all.” I’ll say it again, from personal experience. When I was young, my father contracted a disease which kept him in the hospital for nine months. The cost of the care he received would have bankrupted up many times over. But because he had a super-duper insurance plan, we didn’t pay a penny, and we came out okay. Everyone should have health insurance as a right of citizenship.

  6. lonecat

    lonecat said, about 1 year ago

    Dare I say it? The grammarian in me notes that the subjunctive should be used in contrary to fact conditions: “I wish lack of access to health care were our problem.” No, I’ll let it go.

  7. denis1112

    denis1112 said, about 1 year ago

    This from yet another liberial person who will have to pay nothing by their own admission.

  8. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, about 1 year ago

    Blame the Democrat supporting trial lawyers. If a doctor doesn’t run all these unnecessary tests, they will be sued for malpractice. Just watch daytime tv for a moment on your next day off. Nothing but slimy lawyers looking to sue everybody.
    We need tort reform now, but the lawyers own the Democrats, so it won’t happen unless there’s a BIG win for the Republicans next year. Let’s hope so.

  9. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/oregon-signs-up-just-44-people-for-obamacare-despite-spending-300-million/article/2540529

  10. cobirdman

    cobirdman said, about 1 year ago

    Word

  11. lonecat

    lonecat said, about 1 year ago

    @coraryan

    In Canada it’s paid for through taxes. And it’s cheaper than the US system. But I forgot, you once met someone who claimed his nephew’s brother’s mother-in-law complained about the Canadian system. If only there were Canadians on this list we could ask what they think of it.

  12. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    Been doing the “testing thing” since February, part of the “problem” (esophagitis) may come from the prophylactic drug they had me on to reduce cholesterol, when mine was within margins, but “family history” made statins standard practice to PREVENT heart problems in the future!


    My group policy largely replicates what a “single payer” system would provide, lower cost than individual policies, still not “cheap”, but DOES pay the bills when they start to mount up.


    Insurance, and the ACA (yes, it needs improvement, not repeal) IS a prophylactic measure so people will not be wiped out by medical bills, or die, when the future doesn’t go quite as the “no problems for me” attitude accepts as fact, rather than statistically proven, MYTH!


    Yes, there are often TOO MANY TESTS, but it is the insurance industry, and the “medical providers”- like for profit hospitals, and many that CLAIM to be “non-profit” (with CEOs being paid $4 MILLION A YEAR) jacking up the costs, not lawyers. Though “malpractice” DOES need to be changed so that actual medical professionals decide what is malpractice, not plumbers, housewives, or dog walkers, sitting on juries to make those judgements.

  13. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, about 1 year ago

    Tort reform, although welcome, has actually quietly arrived. In many states there is a maximum amount per occurrence that can be awarded. The days of tens of millions being awarded is mostly a thing of the past.

    The woman in the cartoon brings up an important point. There are two aspects to the problems of providing health care. One is the cost of care given. The other one is our significant need as a society for health care. Our demand is way too high, primarily because people will not eat properly, nor will they exercise. To be fair, a lot of the food available at the local grocery—most everything that does not line the perimeter of most stores—is bad for you: loaded with sodium and sugars under a variety of names, and five-syllable chemicals.

    One problem with reducing demand is the fact that Americans feel entitled to do, eat, and not do, just because we’re Americans. Granted, the idea to limit soft drink sizes in New York was a stupid approach, but the goal was laudable. If people won’t take care of themselves, why are we surprised that it costs so much to keep us healthy? And why don’t we, as a society, realize that the easiest way to avoid costly medical intervention is to just watch what we choose to swallow? Who wants a nanny state? Where is personal responsibility?

  14. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, about 1 year ago

    @Ruff

    I think facts like this are much more relevant to who has influence over congress………..

    Contributions to federal candidates and political committees by lawyers have increased during the past 10 years, and collectively, they are consistently larger during presidential election years. Each cycle, the contributions significantly favor Democrats. In the 2008 election cycle, the industry contributed a massive $234 million to federal political candidates and interests , 76 percent of which went to Democratic candidates and committees.

  15. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, about 1 year ago

    @Ruff

    And this…….
    The top contributor of these substantial funds is “heavy hitter” American Association for Justice, a group of plaintiff’s attorneys formerly known as the Association of Trial Lawyers of America whose main political priority is fighting tort reform. In the past 20 years, the AAJ has donated $31.6 million, 91 percent of which has gone to Democrats, who also generally oppose tort reform.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (16).