Yes on the Botax
We have trillions to spend on wars and corporate subsidies, but when it comes to reforming our 18th century health insurance system, hands get wrung; teeth get gnashed. “Where will the money come from??” “How ever will we pay for this huge government program?!?”
Now, on the one hand we have hundreds of thousands of Americans who are getting sicker and sicker — 45,000 of them die every year — because they can’t afford the medical treatment they need.
On the other hand, hundreds of thousands of self-absorbed over-pampered Americans are constantly indulging themselves with tummy tucks, Botox injections and other beauty treatments that serve absolutely no medical purpose. It’s the medical equivalent of having some people starve while, simultaneously, other people are going “Caviar and truffles again? How boooring. L’ennui [yawn]”
Now, could there possibly be any sort of connection between the above three paragraphs? Hmmmm…wait a minute…[brainstorm]…
dingdingdingdingdingding. The Botax. That’s it!!! Or as Kellie Bundy used to say, “Viola!”
Last year there were 4.7 million Botox injections, at an average cost of $400 each. Now — going way waaay out on a limb here — I’m gonna take a wild guess that these Botox injections didn’t come out of the rent money.
Senate Democrats are making the same guess, and they’ve proposed a five percent excise tax on all elective cosmetic surgeries. Botox injections, cosmetic implants, teeth-whitening — fork it over!
Speaking of taxes and entitlements: The Catholic Diocese of Wilmington has a new policy: Diddle a child, get a lifetime pension. Your tax dollars at work.
And it looks like the teabirthers finally got something right. As rightwads always do, the teabaggers are turning on each other. Go for it! Tear each other apart. Fuck 'em where they breathe!!!
Labels: Botax, Catholic Diocese of Wilmington, elective cosmetic surgeries tax
posted by Tom Harper @ 11:59 AM
39 Comments:
The tea baggers even got pissed at Bible Spice at one of her book signings last night. She didn't stay there long enough and they all started booing. I don't know about you, but I am investing in popcorn futures for the next few years and arm chairs.
Ok, the only minor quibble I have as far as Botox and implants and things like that. It is not a quibble more a, how in the hell will they regulate this type of thing. the reason it is a little iffy for me, what about the people that depend on it for migraines and it has been used successfully on patients with nerve damage. I used it myself for neck pains the beginning of the year. Twice to be exact, didn't work for me but it does for others. I am just afraid the docs lobbying firms would find loopholes with this, know what I mean? You know it will happen, given the history of companies and the greed that is prevalent here.
Ah, the hypocrisy of the RCC and orgs like it. We want to let the kid diddlers get all these benefits but god forbid a same sex couple ask for it HELL NO. Which is worse, two people in a caring, loving relationship or pigs that prey on innocent kids and mess them up, later on in life. No need to answer my out loud question to myself. We just have to look at DC last week for all this to show how hypocritical these sick bastards are. I have nothing but more foul words for churches today, so I best stop while I am ahead and have only hinted at bad language.
yeah well I guess having to wait for a mammogram until you're 50 and then every 2 years after that is better than not getting any.
Or I guess Obama just doesn't care about women's health.
I'll post more later but Lisa, that recommendation was overturned by the HHS secretary 2 days ago OK?
Erik
Jess: Teabaggers pissed at Sarah? Good. That's what those wingtards do. If two Righties disagree on 1% of something, they hate each other. Works for me. Let them all tear each other up.
I assume that only cosmetic treatments are included for that 5% surcharge. The things you're describing are medical. The law will have to be worded in such a way that no medical procedure can fall through the cracks.
A retirement pension for kiddie-diddling priests -- you can't make this shit up.
Lisa: As usual, your comment isn't related to the post.
Erik: It's hard to tell what they'll recommend next. I hate it when these medical agencies keep contradicting themselves.
Amen, on taxing Botox and other purely elective, vanity treatments. I'm guessing this won't be cheered in Hollywood and throughout southern California, though.
That story about pedophile priests is further evidence of what happens when newspapers all over the country, and probably the AP itself, shed copy editors like trees losing their leaves this time of year.
In the first and several paragraphs they're referred to as pedophiles, confirmed pedophiles and abusers. But in the second paragraph, they're referred to as "priests accused of sexual abuse." And down toward the bottom, one has only been accused. OK, which is it? Are these just suspects? Are they self-confessed abusers or have they been investigated, tried and convicted?
I'm not defending the priests, just pointing out that the story is as flaky as a box of Wheaties. The headline is misleading as well.
Last but not least, it looks as though the church is doing what it can to get the Vatican to defrock the priests so it can quit paying them pensions. So at least there's recognition that paying them pensions for life is not right.
Re:the teabaggers, I loved this part of the story, quoting one of their own rabble rousers:
“They’re fractured at the organization level, I think mainly because there are a lot of people who have not had managerial experience who all of a sudden are thrust into the limelight and become intoxicated with it. And when a potential rift comes up, instead of handling it and maybe agreeing to disagree, they splinter and go off on their own.”
Well, duh. Many of these people couldn't get on Jerry Springer's show, if it was still running, because they're such ill-informed, undisciplined, badly behaved loudmouths and lamebrains. I mean, after watching some of them in action, I think Michael Savage would be uncomfortable around them — and he's a rabies case.
Tom, I need to backtrack to find it, but Lisa's comment is the exact comment she left on someone's post today. Somewhat in a rut Lisa?
The best news in this post is the information on the peebaggers. My thinking is, it's difference of opinion all right, but with the added element of, pure ass laziness. These fuckers have never organized their own sorry ass lives, so why would they expend energy on organizing a national movement? After all, that's cutting into their reality t.v. watching time.
Lisa has again demonstrated her A, dishonesty; or B, how badly informed she is. Please, let's not feed the troll.
The price of admission, meaning being paid attention to, ought to be willingness to show some respect for facts and take some care about truth.
It is extremely interesting for me to read the post. Thanx for it. I like such themes and everything that is connected to this matter. I definitely want to read more soon.
I found this on DK a little earlier. There were a couple others but basically the same thing. She has since taken to FB to tell everyone she was sorry but didn't know there were that many people. Probably quit half way through because those liberal elitists didn't give her enough pens or something to that effect.
http://www.dailykos.com/tv/w/002357/
I hope they can regulate the Botox for real medicinal purposes because it appears to give a lot of relief for migraine patients like I said.
I wish the stuff about the priests was made up, I really do. I spent half the day trying to get information how I, as a citizen, could file a suit against them to relieve them of their tax exemption. I have an appointment Monday at the IRS to talk to someone see what I can do other than just write damn letters to congress.
Lisa, the whole "squish the girls" at certain times movement has been around for 15 yrs, look it up. It gets knocked down every time they bring this up. It is not the government doing this. It started during Bush the elder and continued through the boy king. Kathleen Sebellius, in case you don't know the Sec of HHS has already come out to say this is not going to happen. LOOK IT UP or ask nicely and I will provide links, as I am sure others here would for you to follow along.
That's right Erik after they heard the reaction but if you believe that will never happen I have a bridge to sell you.
They won't ration care here they only do that in Canada and the UK.
We will have "choice"(said in a high pitch tone and "competition"(said in a higher pitch tone) because that's what we are being told so we best all just shut up now.
SW: That's true, some of those individual priests were accused but not convicted. There's just too much public fury over this whole issue, with churches covering for pedophile priests, and declaring bankruptcy so they won't have to pay court-ordered damages -- it's too easy to vilify a priest who hasn't been convicted of abuse. I don't want to turn into one of those Republicans who assume a suspected terrorist is already guilty, with or without a trial.
You're right that some of those teabaggers make Jerry Springer's guests look dignified.
jadedj: I think she commented at Demeur's blog a few weeks ago, but that's the only time I've seen her "work" anywhere else. Same wording, you say? She's everywhere.
Peebaggers, all right, another new name for them. They've had their fun, looking stupid and carrying signs with mis-spelled words. Now back to their regular lives -- watching TV, burning crosses...
Anonymous: Thanks.
Jess: LOL. I can't quite feel sorry for somebody who'd spend 3 hours waiting in the cold just for Sarah Palin to sign her book. But it shows what a backstabbing dildo Palin is. Thanks for the link.
I never knew that about Botox (until your earlier comment). I'm glad there's an actual medical use for it. It's too bad the medicinal use gets lumped together with the millions of people who just want fuller lips and smoother skin. There should be more publicity about the medical uses. Or maybe there has been and I just missed it.
Lisa: Still stuck on "rationed health care" in the U.K. and Canada, I see.
Tom, for your viewing pleasure, some info on using Botox for migraines and neck and spine pain. That is the first link. Second one is for neck pain. I was thrown by a horse last year and needed some neck fusion and collarbone surgery. The surgeon after a few visits, tried this on me, as he had on others, to try and lessen the nerve pain I was experiencing. It didn't work for me like I said, but did say it worked for others making all the difference in the world to them pain wise.
http://headaches.about.com/cs/prevention/a/botox_01j.htm
http://www.spineuniverse.com/displayarticle.php/botox-back-neck-pain-3201.html
Lisa, this was not after they heard the reaction you parrot. I think I may start referring to you as Polly from now on. This report was done during the boy kings last year, but you don't know that because you didn't even go look it up did you? You would have found that information plus the info about pap smears also, you betcha *wink*. I can do this with some fancy pageant walking too if you want and maybe that will make you pay attention. Jeez, different studies have been trying to push this for 15 yrs or so and it HAS NOT been put into practice yet has it?
As far as Canada and the UK that has already been bunked and debunked all over the place. I haven't been coming here that long and you are really beginning to make me wonder if you aren't some little child with Cheeto stains all over your keyboard.
Tom, various types of toxins have been shown to help migraine sufferers, and that is a legitimate medical use for Botox, if that's one of them.
Likewise, cosmetic surgery for a child born with a cleft palate, to correct the "split lip" that is part of that birth defect, is a legitimate surgical need. No child should have to start out in life with a correctable, yet uncorrected, deformity that will make him/her embarrassingly different from other kids. That kind of thing can have a profoundly damaging impact on a person's whole life.
But what about cosmetic surgery to remove wrinkles from an actress' face? After all, making a good appearance is a requirement of her career. And, BTW, I'm not talking about a movie star who's used to multi-million-dollar contracts and can well afford her own cosmetic surgery. The actress could as easily be in commercials, off Broadway or road shows and make a modest but to her satisfactory living.
So, what I'm getting at is that this is an area where individual cases need to be evaluated with common sense and compassion. That's why I mentioned purely elective, vanity-type surgery, the prime example being an 18-year-old female of modest proportions who's determined to have megaboobs. That's OK, but she should be prepared to pay for the remodeling.
It was extremely interesting for me to read that blog. Thanx for it. I like such topics and everything connected to them. I would like to read a bit more soon.
What this whole issue still all boils down to is profits over non profits. Are we willing to move to a non profit system? As I see it those billions of dollars in profits sure could provide a bunch of health care to a lot of people who don't have it.
As for the botax you know doctors will find a way to make it medically necessary. They always do.
As for rationing we already have rationing with the insurance companies. But I'd rather have a system where I know that maybe I'll have to wait for treatment knowing in the end that I will get it rather than being rejected by some bean counter that's looking out for the bottom line.
Wait, so I can't get implants, is that what Hussein X is saying? There's so much confusing and opposing information out there, I'm just going to watch Fox.
I guess Obama just doesn't care about women's health.
As opposed to Republicans, who don't care about anybody's?
Greta Van Susteren will be quivering with fear about the botox tax, if you ever remember seeing her when she worked for CNN, the change in past years since she has worked for FOX is dramatic. She looks about 30 years younger, she must have spent a fortune on cosmetic surgery.
This is old information, as the programme aired a year ago, but it is still interesting, given Lisa's continuing moan about Canada and the UK. This guy endeavoured to investigate health care in "aggressively capitalist" countries, if I remember his spiel.(I believe the programme can be viewed on-line)
I saw this broadcast recently, and he kept asking health care professionals in each country " How many people a year declare bankruptcy because of medical care costs.. ?" Each looked at him with a degree of puzzlement, and said " None". Or, " That is unheard of in our country".
He also said that in the US, 700,000 people declare bankruptcy each year because of medical costs.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/
Not relevant for folks with enough resources for megaboobs, I'll assume.
It's easy to wage taxes on botox...you make the doctors and clinics that do elective plastic surgeries (for purely cosmetic reasons that don't entail fixing a birth defect or an injury)pay a tax, which they charge the customer for. It works just like sales tax. Personally, I'm likin' it.
Lisa: I was going to say that in case you didn't notice, Kathleen Sebelius of the HHS said that guidelines won't be changing over that report. So, you keep right on getting the girls schmooshed once a year. However, Erik already enlightened you. But I'll add one more thing: That report was commissioned by the Bush Administration, so ask what their ulterior motive was.
SW, but it's fun to feed the trolls! :)
Jess how many people have you spoken to from the UK or Canada about their health care or any other country with socialized medicine? When you have I would love to hear what they have to say about it then we can compare notes.
Now let me go wipe the hate off my monitor.
Jess: Interesting. Thanks for the links.
Anonymous: Surgery to correct a birth defect or any injury would certainly not be lumped in with cosmetic surgery.
As far as actors or anybody else whose job prospects depend on their appearance: Sorry, fork over the 5% surcharge. I understand a lot of people want to improve their looks, whether it's personal or job-related, but it's not a medical problem.
Demeur: I agree, I'd rather have to wait for a non-emergency procedure, knowing that I will get it, than have it denied completely by an insurance company.
Randal: Sorry, that tummytuck and those implants are gonna cost ya.
Lew: Republicans do too care about a person's health, at least while the person is still a fetus.
Holte: I haven't heard of her, but I can think of a few actresses like that. Jacqueline Smith looks like she just walked off the set of Charlie's Angels 30 years ago. Same with Marilu Henner (Taxi); she looks different somehow than she did 30 years ago, but not a day older.
Anonymous: I saw part of that same program on PBS. Somebody from Switzerland was being interviewed. The interviewer gave that same figure -- 700,000 Americans go bankrupt each year because of medical bills. He asked the guy from Switzerland how many Swiss go bankrupt from medical bills, and the Swiss guy just looked at him like he'd never heard of anything like that. He said "None" and that it would never happen in Switzerland.
Bee: Sounds like a plan. I'm likin' it too.
Lisa: Why bother wiping the hate off your monitor? It'll just reappear as soon as you start typing again.
The socialized systems in other countries aren't half the size as ours. Except maybe Russia and from what I hear a doctor's visit is like worse than a bad nightmare.
It can't be possible to cover everyone without rationing. It will be virtually impossible.
And if the plan is so great why did congress exempt themselves from the plan?
I'll tell you why because it has nothing to do with choice and competition or health care. It has to do with they had to get this done so they can get a notch in their belt because it's historic. Bu the only thing historic will be the long lines and lack of providers. Oh and the tremendous burden it will put on us as far as cost and the assault on our seniors. What a bunch of shameful POS they are. So now they have to get amnesty done because they will need the votes to make up for the votes they are going to lose from our seniors.
By the way I got a great deal on a bridge for you.
If socialized medicine is such a nightmare in England, Canada and Europe, then why haven't any of those people switched back to our "superior" system? Hmmmmm?
Tom they have supplemental insurance or those who can afford it in the UK and Canada.
Remember Paul W saying in the same sentence the NHS is good but for certain things he has private insurance. So maybe for basic stuff it's okay but to me that means the government won't cover things they may think too expensive.
But I also think one of the reasons is when all the baby boomers are of age there won't be enough money in the Medicare System so they will have to ration their care because we won't be able to afford them.
Lisa, do your research, and you won't sound so much like the "Parrot" Jess has considered naming you. If you want to get anyone to listen to you, atleast you should not keep trotting out the same old tired rhetoric.
Me? I just argue for sport.
You cannot expect to get any sympathy nor support from any real humans by defending a health system that allows 45 million of its citizens to go without health insurance/care, and that tolerates 700,000 of it's citizens to have to declare bankruptcy EACH YEAR because of health care costs.. and that tolerates health care insurance systems that won't cover people with "pre-existing conditions".
I've traveled and lived in quite a few countries over the years. With few exceptions, virtually every person I've had these conversations with looks at me with shock and disbelief that the US allows any of the above mentioned situations. No BS.
Lisa, look into it. Believe it or not, the US is not the only "free market capitalist" country on the planet. And, the others have national health care systems. Hmmm. That bastion of commie socialists, Japan, spends about 6% of their GDP on their health care. That other commie stronghold, Taiwan also only spends about 6%. The US spends 16%. And, do you want to compare administrative costs with others? Those numbers get real embarrassing.
But, Lisa, you don't have to go so far to find health care like one finds in the UK or Canada. You know all those brave men and women that are veterans of the US armed forces? You know the health care system THEY have? Look into it.
The splintering of the teabaggers is nothing but good news to me. I have grown tired of them.
The logic behind people against health care reform is worrisome. Basically, as long as they have their insurance and have easy access to a doctor screw everyone else. there is absolutely no awareness that they can be on the wrong end of things and not have insurance one day should their bubble pop. I hear the creedo, we can take care of ourselves." Yeah,try doing that when you get laid off, burn through your savings, exhaust COBRA and come down with a major illness. then what? They can't grasp that concept and keep telling themselves that it can't happen to them. I wonder how many tea baggers have been out of work for over a year due the economy. I'm sure there are some that have are still go with this mentality but I call it too stupid to get out of your own way.
Maybe they (like true patriots) will perform the surgery themselves while biting a leather strap and getting liquored up. Our forefathers did it!!!
Her is the problem people are more worried about the economy right now. More people are going hungry and losing their homes and apartments. Maybe if there was some honest concern about that coming out of Washington then maybe people would have more confidence but this health care bill is about Obama and getting it done so he can get his gold star and they are bribing people to do it.
And my question again if it's so great why has congress exempted themselves from it?
Here's an interesting article I found on the left wing blog Salon from all that research I don't do:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/camille_paglia/index.html?story=/opinion/paglia/2009/11/10/pelosi
Um, Lisa there are plenty of resources available for you to search yourself, lest I be told I am only giving you the information I want you to see.
Here is one that one of our anon posters just left you can look to for some. Otherwise go to sick around the world, they have a pretty comprehensive view about,yup, sick around the world and the way it is all dealt with.
Where do you need to wipe hate from your monitor from me? That was not hate that was an assumption from me. You don't warrant enough recognition, time or energy from me to hate you. I have the Catholic church in my crosshairs right now and unless you are a church toffee nose*, you can be rest assured I am not going after you right now.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/
*As far as I have been told, it is a British slang expression for the upper class member of any group.
Lisa said
It can't be possible to cover everyone without rationing. It will be virtually impossible.
And if the plan is so great why did congress exempt themselves from the plan?
If you were one of those people who is a political crackhead *hangs head in shame after Chris Dodd's calling out* that watches this stuff like reality TV, you would know it was spoken about yesterday. I cannot remember the senator, but he said this would be offered up to every last one of them. There goes that talking point, like fairy dust out the window.
Lisa said:
"Her is the problem people are more worried about the economy right now. More people are going hungry and losing their homes and apartments...."
You are aware there was a bill to extend further the unemployment benefits that the right is not willing to vote for right? You are aware that the dems have suggested using the rest of the TARP monies to help with mortgages and smaller business right? I will give you one guess and ONLY one as to what could possibly, maybe holding this up.
Lisa also said:
"Maybe if there was some honest concern about that coming out of Washington then maybe people would have more confidence...."
There actually is a lot of concern but guess where it goes to die, the concern I mean? If you can answer this, and answer it honestly, for every comment on this particular blog post, I will donate to the charity of your choice.
As far as this being PO's, yes it is, in as much as he is advocating these ideas. Congress, for the first time in a long time, has had to get up off their butts and do the work they are sent there to do. I know it is very confusing for those of us that thought the last 8-10 yrs is how things were supposed to work. Hint, it's not. Congress does their work and forwards it on. Here is a paraphrase from Harry Reid yesterday the last 5-10 minutes of the debate. These ideas need to be debated in the senate, if you don't even want debate why are you here. I think that pretty much sums up what many of us are thinking. Let debate get the airing out for any issue that comes up, what are you scared of. Not you specifically, just in general why are people afraid of the back and forth with the ideas presented.
You also repeated the fallacy about the HC not being used by x,y or z in the senate. It will be added as a choice, for them and everyone else.
Jess your observations are spot on and it looks like you are very on top of the issue. As for myself I prefer not to watch the sausage being made. But I must stop to consider that some 90,000 people will die before this bill even goes into effect in two years. With no insurance I just hope I'm not one of them.
Lisa sez: "Her is the problem people are more worried about the economy right now. More people are going hungry and losing their homes and apartments."
And you don't think spending nearly THREE times as much as other capitalist, developed countries do on the current health care system, to end up with a worse result, multiplied by tens of millions who are left to resort to public resources, is relevant to the issues you raise?
If the health system actually helped the whole population in a cost effective way (as it does in many other countries), the monies currently being wasted in health care in the US could be spent on other things, public or private.
But the reality is that the private industries that are currently profiting from the US health care systems have NO incentive to change it. Just like the oil and car companies spend huge amounts of money trying to discredit "Climate Change", the insurance, pharmo and other beneficiaries of the current health care industry are spending huge sums to convince folks that "reforms" will result in rationing, death squads and worse.
(I won't get into the obvious use of these concerns to create negative association with Obama, by folks with obvious political agendas, right now)
The economy is in bad shape because of GREED. It isn't about laws and regulation. It is about the absence of morality, ethics, compassion, caring, and feeling responsible for the damages ones' actions have upon others. Those financial games-players knew/know full well that their actions will mean millions of old age pensioners will loose their life savings, but they don't have the moral character to care.
The laywers will always be able to find "loopholes", but like "drug abuse", it is the person who decides to abuse, not the substance. The opportunity to abuse others for personal gain will always be there, if one wants to go that route. Laws aren't the answer, any more that the "War on Drugs" with more police and surveillance is.. It IS about education.
Ah Demuer, this is one of those things that turns me on. I know it is so sad, for a 20 something, but that is just how it is. It is just another thing I can blame my parents for when I decide to write that nasty book about them and the way I was raised :). They got me ivolved early on in politics and paying attention to what is happening with the gubbmint and I just have not found it boring yet. I don't like the sausage making process either, but it has to be done. otherwise we end up with tax cuts for rich people, that when they sunset next year we will be about 2 trillion out of pocket. Like this right here.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/11/ta111909.html
We will go to war with an imaginary foe, terror, drugs, (insert asinine foe here) that is nowhere on any budget. I like to see what they are doing, to make my calls and get people involved with their gubbmint. It is MINE after all, so I like to have a little say in what happens with it.
Demuer I hope that you aren't either. I know that the day this gets signed, there will be a high risk pool people can begin buying into and for those with pre existing conditions that have been refused insurance or care, they will now have somewhere to purchase it. I have been advising a couple of friends I know, in the same boat you are, to go ahead and apply for insurance now and when they are refused for the pre existing conditions clause, they will have info on hand to show when they sign up for whatever when the bill is passed. It is beyond me why they just did not do a one pager that said..Medicare for all starting 1-1-2010. That is where they should have started and negotiated down to an acceptable public option IMO. Who am I though, just one vote that can't compete with big insurance and their funding to candidates.
Lisa
"And my question again if it's so great why has congress exempted themselves from it?"
We have been saying that Congress had the best health plan while saying a good health plan for us is unaffordable, theirs is government run, and they have no problem with it. You may also remember several post ago I presented to you to ask your conservatives in congress if a government health plan is so bad and expensive "why do you have one?"
As usual you had no answer
Erik
just to clarify for lisa, who still has her head in her ass
the panel that recommended dropping mammograms was not a govt panel, but a medical one -
the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force consists of clinicians, not govt hacks
and watch your beloved insurance companies start dropping coverage of mammograms and pap smears
Their insurance isn't government run it's government or should I say taxpayer subsidized.
You are kidding yourself if you think they want a single payer system for themselves.
I am sure they will let an insurance company stay in business to benefit them like they did with Goldman Sachs.
All big corporations are evil unless the democrats own them or benefit from them.
the panel that recommended dropping mammograms was not a govt panel, but a medical one -
Who is government appointed and pretty. I have to say something is "fishy" about the timing.
I think we are being played with by arrogance.
The only reason insurance companies will drop them is when they can't compete with the government who will over time will have no competition. How comforting.
Post a Comment
<< Home