|
Sanya12364 Posts
On November 13 2009 01:46 Stratos_speAr wrote:
Stop throwing around bullshit phrases. Obviously "the American way" isn't working very well. Also, I can't believe you are trying to use religion in your argument at all. Religion is one of the leading promoters of ignorance and intolerance throughout history, and has absolutely no place in governing society. Oh, and if you think it's always the person's fault for not having something, then you are a spoiled, rich asshole that is completely clueless about actually having difficulties throughout life and you shouldn't have a place discussing how our government should be run either.
This is no way to speak to someone that you from whom you suggest we take from in order to pay for these social program that you so apparently support. Such pretensions of entitlement to other's fruits of labour is even more unbecoming than a spoiled brat that consumes his own wealth.
It is the attitude of spoiled brats that consumes other people's wealth.
|
On November 13 2009 00:18 Undisputed- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2009 00:08 Sadist wrote:On November 12 2009 23:55 Undisputed- wrote:On November 12 2009 20:54 RoyW wrote:
It's almost as if the extensive post demonstrating that socialised healthcare, as it exists in other western nations, is not only vastly more economically sound that the free market implementation that exists in the US but produces better results and service on average than thge US, was completely ignored.
Aside from idealistic theory, can you produce some empirical evidence that shows that free-market for profit healthcare provides cheaper service while keeping the opportunity for all the populice to have obtainable access to health services.
Also, it has been shown that free-market healthcare lowers the rates at which people will attempt early diagnoses. Generally speaking, the later the diagnosis, the more expensive it is to treat a health problem. Whether this cost is handled by the government or insurance companies(which will be passed onto customers - see massive premium rise over past decade), is there any demonstration of how the free market would tackle this problem? Socialized health care is bad for America for a number of reasons from lack of choices, to poor quality, to waiting lines, to increase in government control over our lives. Socialized health care is un-American and unconstitutional. If you don't have insurance it is nobody's fault but your own, get your priorities straight. I believe Americans aren't so weak that they need the government to cling to. Why should the American taxpayer or anyone for that matter pay for you involuntarily? Socialized medicine might be ok for Euros and the Canadians. Their Constitutions don't guarantee freedom "under God". They have spent most of the last century preparing themselves for a master, and they are well suited for one. while I feel people need to take more responsibility these days you have obviously never experienced or even been around hard times at all in your life. In Michigan you cant get a job with health insurance atm because no one will hire you full time especially if you are older. My father is 62 and his company he worked for for 27 years went bankrupt about 6 years ago. He found a new job worked there for 5 years and then was laid off about a year ago. Hes 62. Hell be working forever. Someone his age isnt going to get hired very easily so what is he supposed to do? We have insurance from unemployment for the time being thankfully, if not wed be in debt and fucked. Luckily my parents own our house so we dont have to worry about mortgage payments or anything. My neighbor is an amazing guy who sold pot and got caught and went to prison for 2.5 years (I think he had some priors when he was in his early 20's) he cant get a job anywhere. His wife had a child at 16 and consequently has no education. She cant get a good paying job anywhere either. What the fuck do you expect these people to do? You think McDonalds is goign to give them health insurance let alone enough hours to pay for their mortgage? They probably cant even afford an apartment. You honestly have no idea what its like to live in Michigan especially if you worked in Manufacturing or the Auto industry here. There are a lot of people who can afford health insurance but would rather spend their money on something else. Under the current system they could qualify for medicaid.
what about for those who its either housepayment/utilities/food or health insurance? Not everyone can afford $800 a month for health insurance.
While we are on the topic of health insurance....what about the many people who have to choose between their eyes or their teeth? Seriously. Some people I swear have never been in the real world in their lives.
|
On November 13 2009 02:22 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2009 00:18 Undisputed- wrote:On November 13 2009 00:08 Sadist wrote:On November 12 2009 23:55 Undisputed- wrote:On November 12 2009 20:54 RoyW wrote:
It's almost as if the extensive post demonstrating that socialised healthcare, as it exists in other western nations, is not only vastly more economically sound that the free market implementation that exists in the US but produces better results and service on average than thge US, was completely ignored.
Aside from idealistic theory, can you produce some empirical evidence that shows that free-market for profit healthcare provides cheaper service while keeping the opportunity for all the populice to have obtainable access to health services.
Also, it has been shown that free-market healthcare lowers the rates at which people will attempt early diagnoses. Generally speaking, the later the diagnosis, the more expensive it is to treat a health problem. Whether this cost is handled by the government or insurance companies(which will be passed onto customers - see massive premium rise over past decade), is there any demonstration of how the free market would tackle this problem? Socialized health care is bad for America for a number of reasons from lack of choices, to poor quality, to waiting lines, to increase in government control over our lives. Socialized health care is un-American and unconstitutional. If you don't have insurance it is nobody's fault but your own, get your priorities straight. I believe Americans aren't so weak that they need the government to cling to. Why should the American taxpayer or anyone for that matter pay for you involuntarily? Socialized medicine might be ok for Euros and the Canadians. Their Constitutions don't guarantee freedom "under God". They have spent most of the last century preparing themselves for a master, and they are well suited for one. while I feel people need to take more responsibility these days you have obviously never experienced or even been around hard times at all in your life. In Michigan you cant get a job with health insurance atm because no one will hire you full time especially if you are older. My father is 62 and his company he worked for for 27 years went bankrupt about 6 years ago. He found a new job worked there for 5 years and then was laid off about a year ago. Hes 62. Hell be working forever. Someone his age isnt going to get hired very easily so what is he supposed to do? We have insurance from unemployment for the time being thankfully, if not wed be in debt and fucked. Luckily my parents own our house so we dont have to worry about mortgage payments or anything. My neighbor is an amazing guy who sold pot and got caught and went to prison for 2.5 years (I think he had some priors when he was in his early 20's) he cant get a job anywhere. His wife had a child at 16 and consequently has no education. She cant get a good paying job anywhere either. What the fuck do you expect these people to do? You think McDonalds is goign to give them health insurance let alone enough hours to pay for their mortgage? They probably cant even afford an apartment. You honestly have no idea what its like to live in Michigan especially if you worked in Manufacturing or the Auto industry here. There are a lot of people who can afford health insurance but would rather spend their money on something else. Under the current system they could qualify for medicaid. what about for those who its either housepayment/utilities/food or health insurance? Not everyone can afford $800 a month for health insurance. While we are on the topic of health insurance....what about the many people who have to choose between their eyes or their teeth? Seriously. Some people I swear have never been in the real world in their lives.
Don't live above your means (another problem in the US).
Not sure what you are getting at about eyes and teeth do you mean dental insurance?
|
On November 13 2009 02:34 Undisputed- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2009 02:22 Sadist wrote:On November 13 2009 00:18 Undisputed- wrote:On November 13 2009 00:08 Sadist wrote:On November 12 2009 23:55 Undisputed- wrote:On November 12 2009 20:54 RoyW wrote:
It's almost as if the extensive post demonstrating that socialised healthcare, as it exists in other western nations, is not only vastly more economically sound that the free market implementation that exists in the US but produces better results and service on average than thge US, was completely ignored.
Aside from idealistic theory, can you produce some empirical evidence that shows that free-market for profit healthcare provides cheaper service while keeping the opportunity for all the populice to have obtainable access to health services.
Also, it has been shown that free-market healthcare lowers the rates at which people will attempt early diagnoses. Generally speaking, the later the diagnosis, the more expensive it is to treat a health problem. Whether this cost is handled by the government or insurance companies(which will be passed onto customers - see massive premium rise over past decade), is there any demonstration of how the free market would tackle this problem? Socialized health care is bad for America for a number of reasons from lack of choices, to poor quality, to waiting lines, to increase in government control over our lives. Socialized health care is un-American and unconstitutional. If you don't have insurance it is nobody's fault but your own, get your priorities straight. I believe Americans aren't so weak that they need the government to cling to. Why should the American taxpayer or anyone for that matter pay for you involuntarily? Socialized medicine might be ok for Euros and the Canadians. Their Constitutions don't guarantee freedom "under God". They have spent most of the last century preparing themselves for a master, and they are well suited for one. while I feel people need to take more responsibility these days you have obviously never experienced or even been around hard times at all in your life. In Michigan you cant get a job with health insurance atm because no one will hire you full time especially if you are older. My father is 62 and his company he worked for for 27 years went bankrupt about 6 years ago. He found a new job worked there for 5 years and then was laid off about a year ago. Hes 62. Hell be working forever. Someone his age isnt going to get hired very easily so what is he supposed to do? We have insurance from unemployment for the time being thankfully, if not wed be in debt and fucked. Luckily my parents own our house so we dont have to worry about mortgage payments or anything. My neighbor is an amazing guy who sold pot and got caught and went to prison for 2.5 years (I think he had some priors when he was in his early 20's) he cant get a job anywhere. His wife had a child at 16 and consequently has no education. She cant get a good paying job anywhere either. What the fuck do you expect these people to do? You think McDonalds is goign to give them health insurance let alone enough hours to pay for their mortgage? They probably cant even afford an apartment. You honestly have no idea what its like to live in Michigan especially if you worked in Manufacturing or the Auto industry here. There are a lot of people who can afford health insurance but would rather spend their money on something else. Under the current system they could qualify for medicaid. what about for those who its either housepayment/utilities/food or health insurance? Not everyone can afford $800 a month for health insurance. While we are on the topic of health insurance....what about the many people who have to choose between their eyes or their teeth? Seriously. Some people I swear have never been in the real world in their lives. Don't live above your means (another problem in the US). Not sure what you are getting at about eyes and teeth do you mean dental insurance?
dental and optical.
People can have a change in income. What do you mean dont live above your means. You are talking about people who spend foolishly. Im trying to get the point across that that doesnt encompass everyone. There are plenty of people who have done everything correctly but by simple circumstance they have to choose between their health and their home. That is crime.
|
Sanya12364 Posts
The question to ask is "WHY BUY INSURANCE!?" Why is insurance even a model for delivering day-to-day health care services? Catastrophic health insurance, sure. Emergency service plans, sure. But day-to-day health care services!? Precautionary health services? Elective drugs?? Why?
The number of people that opt out by choosing not to pay for a health plan and the number of people than can't afford the average full featured health plan is testimony to how awful of a model it is. All these "fixes" are like tiny bandages over a gaping flesh wound.
|
On November 13 2009 02:47 TanGeng wrote:
The question to ask is "WHY BUY INSURANCE!?" Why is insurance even a model for delivering day-to-day health care services? Catastrophic health insurance, sure. Emergency service plans, sure. But day-to-day health care services!? Precautionary health services? Elective drugs?? Why?
The number of people that opt out by choosing not to pay for a health plan and the number of people than can't afford the average full featured health plan is testimony to how awful of a model it is. All these "fixes" are like tiny bandages over a gaping flesh wound.
fair enough but when you have to take medication that costs several hundred dollars a month and you have regular doctors visits shit adds up.
Anyone who has some type of chronic condition would be destroyed with the current system without health insurance.
|
On November 13 2009 01:56 Undisputed- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2009 01:46 Stratos_speAr wrote:On November 12 2009 23:55 Undisputed- wrote:On November 12 2009 20:54 RoyW wrote:
It's almost as if the extensive post demonstrating that socialised healthcare, as it exists in other western nations, is not only vastly more economically sound that the free market implementation that exists in the US but produces better results and service on average than thge US, was completely ignored.
Aside from idealistic theory, can you produce some empirical evidence that shows that free-market for profit healthcare provides cheaper service while keeping the opportunity for all the populice to have obtainable access to health services.
Also, it has been shown that free-market healthcare lowers the rates at which people will attempt early diagnoses. Generally speaking, the later the diagnosis, the more expensive it is to treat a health problem. Whether this cost is handled by the government or insurance companies(which will be passed onto customers - see massive premium rise over past decade), is there any demonstration of how the free market would tackle this problem? Socialized health care is bad for America for a number of reasons from lack of choices, to poor quality, to waiting lines, to increase in government control over our lives. Socialized health care is un-American and unconstitutional. If you don't have insurance it is nobody's fault but your own, get your priorities straight.I believe Americans aren't so weak that they need the government to cling to. Why should the American taxpayer or anyone for that matter pay for you involuntarily? Socialized medicine might be ok for Euros and the Canadians. Their Constitutions don't guarantee freedom "under God". They have spent most of the last century preparing themselves for a master, and they are well suited for one. Stop throwing around bullshit phrases. Obviously "the American way" isn't working very well. Also, I can't believe you are trying to use religion in your argument at all. Religion is one of the leading promoters of ignorance and intolerance throughout history, and has absolutely no place in governing society. Oh, and if you think it's always the person's fault for not having something, then you are a spoiled, rich asshole that is completely clueless about actually having difficulties throughout life and you shouldn't have a place discussing how our government should be run either. I don't believe in religion, I put under god in quotes because for me I'll take that as humans have rights and freedoms they are inherently born with. Explain how the American way "isn't working well" and how an alternative would work better. I'm a spoiled, rich asshole because I have a job and pay for my own healthcare. K w/e.
Then don't bring "Under God" into it at all. It doesn't imply anything special. Something that isn't completely free market doesn't automatically mean that it's going to take away all kinds of freedoms. A balance between individual freedoms and government control is needed. I consider myself very libertarian and even I believe this.
Are you kidding? Obviously things aren't working well if the economy is in its current state and Congress considering this kind of overhaul of the healthcare system.
You're a spoiled, rich, ignorant asshole because you believe that its always a person's fault if they are in economic troubles. Well, guess what, you are straight up WRONG, and the fact that you believe this shows just how ignorant you are.
This is no way to speak to someone that you from whom you suggest we take from in order to pay for these social program that you so apparently support. Such pretensions of entitlement to other's fruits of labour is even more unbecoming than a spoiled brat that consumes his own wealth.
It is the attitude of spoiled brats that consumes other people's wealth.
I never mentioned that I support all those ideas. Do you know what assuming does? It makes you look like an ass, so stop doing it. I was merely criticizing Undisputed because his kind of thinking is just so wrong that its painful. And yes, in this case, his opinion is WRONG.
|
On November 13 2009 02:02 TanGeng wrote:
Such pretensions of entitlement to other's fruits of labour is even more unbecoming than a spoiled brat that consumes his own wealth.
It is the attitude of spoiled brats that consumes other people's wealth.
Yep, so the buisness elite with their so-called 'jobs' keeps earning exorbiant amounts, while the average working-class wage stagnates. Average blue-collar income has fallen far behind white-collar earnings, CEOs makes thousands of times more money than hard-working employees.
Income balance is totally skewered in the U.S. People with normal jobs, working their asses of every day, can only just get by. But should one accident happen, they are fucked. Losing your job + some illness that requires drugs (fucking jacked up prices to pay executives) can bankrupt a family.
Don't tell me the working class is going to suffer from a better, fairer health-care system. The rich and ultra-rich will. Spoiled brats as they are, thinking they are better because they earn more. Consuming the wealth created by the common worker, loading the consumer with debt, and ruining the american economy in the process. Scum of the earth.
|
On November 13 2009 06:16 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2009 01:56 Undisputed- wrote:On November 13 2009 01:46 Stratos_speAr wrote:On November 12 2009 23:55 Undisputed- wrote:On November 12 2009 20:54 RoyW wrote:
It's almost as if the extensive post demonstrating that socialised healthcare, as it exists in other western nations, is not only vastly more economically sound that the free market implementation that exists in the US but produces better results and service on average than thge US, was completely ignored.
Aside from idealistic theory, can you produce some empirical evidence that shows that free-market for profit healthcare provides cheaper service while keeping the opportunity for all the populice to have obtainable access to health services.
Also, it has been shown that free-market healthcare lowers the rates at which people will attempt early diagnoses. Generally speaking, the later the diagnosis, the more expensive it is to treat a health problem. Whether this cost is handled by the government or insurance companies(which will be passed onto customers - see massive premium rise over past decade), is there any demonstration of how the free market would tackle this problem? Socialized health care is bad for America for a number of reasons from lack of choices, to poor quality, to waiting lines, to increase in government control over our lives. Socialized health care is un-American and unconstitutional. If you don't have insurance it is nobody's fault but your own, get your priorities straight.I believe Americans aren't so weak that they need the government to cling to. Why should the American taxpayer or anyone for that matter pay for you involuntarily? Socialized medicine might be ok for Euros and the Canadians. Their Constitutions don't guarantee freedom "under God". They have spent most of the last century preparing themselves for a master, and they are well suited for one. Stop throwing around bullshit phrases. Obviously "the American way" isn't working very well. Also, I can't believe you are trying to use religion in your argument at all. Religion is one of the leading promoters of ignorance and intolerance throughout history, and has absolutely no place in governing society. Oh, and if you think it's always the person's fault for not having something, then you are a spoiled, rich asshole that is completely clueless about actually having difficulties throughout life and you shouldn't have a place discussing how our government should be run either. I don't believe in religion, I put under god in quotes because for me I'll take that as humans have rights and freedoms they are inherently born with. Explain how the American way "isn't working well" and how an alternative would work better. I'm a spoiled, rich asshole because I have a job and pay for my own healthcare. K w/e. Then don't bring "Under God" into it at all. It doesn't imply anything special. Something that isn't completely free market doesn't automatically mean that it's going to take away all kinds of freedoms. A balance between individual freedoms and government control is needed. I consider myself very libertarian and even I believe this. Are you kidding? Obviously things aren't working well if the economy is in its current state and Congress considering this kind of overhaul of the healthcare system. You're a spoiled, rich, ignorant asshole because you believe that its always a person's fault if they are in economic troubles. Well, guess what, you are straight up WRONG, and the fact that you believe this shows just how ignorant you are.
Ok so "things" aren't working well. Great.
Taking the moral high ground is a cop out, try again.
What is wrong, are people like you who demonize success almost as if it's a crime. I don't have a problem with people using welfare/medicaid type programs when times are rough. But there is a lot of dead weight in this country leeching and abusing public assistance programs beyond what they were meant for.
Not to mention how the government can't even run the medicare/medicaid programs properly with astronomical levels of fraud (only about 5% of claims are audited). Going to trust them to run 1/6 of the US economy? No thanks.
|
On November 13 2009 06:55 Undisputed- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2009 06:16 Stratos_speAr wrote:On November 13 2009 01:56 Undisputed- wrote:On November 13 2009 01:46 Stratos_speAr wrote:On November 12 2009 23:55 Undisputed- wrote:On November 12 2009 20:54 RoyW wrote:
It's almost as if the extensive post demonstrating that socialised healthcare, as it exists in other western nations, is not only vastly more economically sound that the free market implementation that exists in the US but produces better results and service on average than thge US, was completely ignored.
Aside from idealistic theory, can you produce some empirical evidence that shows that free-market for profit healthcare provides cheaper service while keeping the opportunity for all the populice to have obtainable access to health services.
Also, it has been shown that free-market healthcare lowers the rates at which people will attempt early diagnoses. Generally speaking, the later the diagnosis, the more expensive it is to treat a health problem. Whether this cost is handled by the government or insurance companies(which will be passed onto customers - see massive premium rise over past decade), is there any demonstration of how the free market would tackle this problem? Socialized health care is bad for America for a number of reasons from lack of choices, to poor quality, to waiting lines, to increase in government control over our lives. Socialized health care is un-American and unconstitutional. If you don't have insurance it is nobody's fault but your own, get your priorities straight.I believe Americans aren't so weak that they need the government to cling to. Why should the American taxpayer or anyone for that matter pay for you involuntarily? Socialized medicine might be ok for Euros and the Canadians. Their Constitutions don't guarantee freedom "under God". They have spent most of the last century preparing themselves for a master, and they are well suited for one. Stop throwing around bullshit phrases. Obviously "the American way" isn't working very well. Also, I can't believe you are trying to use religion in your argument at all. Religion is one of the leading promoters of ignorance and intolerance throughout history, and has absolutely no place in governing society. Oh, and if you think it's always the person's fault for not having something, then you are a spoiled, rich asshole that is completely clueless about actually having difficulties throughout life and you shouldn't have a place discussing how our government should be run either. I don't believe in religion, I put under god in quotes because for me I'll take that as humans have rights and freedoms they are inherently born with. Explain how the American way "isn't working well" and how an alternative would work better. I'm a spoiled, rich asshole because I have a job and pay for my own healthcare. K w/e. Then don't bring "Under God" into it at all. It doesn't imply anything special. Something that isn't completely free market doesn't automatically mean that it's going to take away all kinds of freedoms. A balance between individual freedoms and government control is needed. I consider myself very libertarian and even I believe this. Are you kidding? Obviously things aren't working well if the economy is in its current state and Congress considering this kind of overhaul of the healthcare system. You're a spoiled, rich, ignorant asshole because you believe that its always a person's fault if they are in economic troubles. Well, guess what, you are straight up WRONG, and the fact that you believe this shows just how ignorant you are. Ok so "things" aren't working well. Great. Taking the moral high ground is a cop out, try again. What is wrong, are people like you who demonize success almost as if it's a crime. I don't have a problem with people using welfare/medicaid type programs when times are rough. But there is a lot of dead weight in this country leeching and abusing public assistance programs beyond what they were meant for. Not to mention how the government can't even run the medicare/medicaid programs properly with astronomical levels of fraud (only about 5% of claims are audited). Going to trust them to run 1/6 of the US economy? No thanks.
so instead of always talking about the negative how about people come up with other solutions. I swear conservatives bitch and moan about government intervention but then never come up with anything. They ignore the problems. On the odd occasion they do come up with something it almost never addresses the problem at all. I dont give a fuck who comes up with the solution if it works properly and everyone can receive healthcare/dental/optical as "needed."
|
On November 13 2009 06:39 Piretes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2009 02:02 TanGeng wrote:
Such pretensions of entitlement to other's fruits of labour is even more unbecoming than a spoiled brat that consumes his own wealth.
It is the attitude of spoiled brats that consumes other people's wealth. Yep, so the buisness elite with their so-called 'jobs' keeps earning exorbiant amounts, while the average working-class wage stagnates. Average blue-collar income has fallen far behind white-collar earnings, CEOs makes thousands of times more money than hard-working employees. Income balance is totally skewered in the U.S. People with normal jobs, working their asses of every day, can only just get by. But should one accident happen, they are fucked. Losing your job + some illness that requires drugs (fucking jacked up prices to pay executives) can bankrupt a family. Don't tell me the working class is going to suffer from a better, fairer health-care system. The rich and ultra-rich will. Spoiled brats as they are, thinking they are better because they earn more. Consuming the wealth created by the common worker, loading the consumer with debt, and ruining the american economy in the process. Scum of the earth.
Yeah that's fine but what about the people who actually worked hard to get their money? Sounds like you are assuming that everyone that's rich is a douchebag
|
Sanya12364 Posts
On November 13 2009 06:39 Piretes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2009 02:02 TanGeng wrote:
Such pretensions of entitlement to other's fruits of labour is even more unbecoming than a spoiled brat that consumes his own wealth.
It is the attitude of spoiled brats that consumes other people's wealth. Yep, so the buisness elite with their so-called 'jobs' keeps earning exorbiant amounts, while the average working-class wage stagnates. Average blue-collar income has fallen far behind white-collar earnings, CEOs makes thousands of times more money than hard-working employees. Income balance is totally skewered in the U.S. People with normal jobs, working their asses of every day, can only just get by. But should one accident happen, they are fucked. Losing your job + some illness that requires drugs (fucking jacked up prices to pay executives) can bankrupt a family. Don't tell me the working class is going to suffer from a better, fairer health-care system. The rich and ultra-rich will. Spoiled brats as they are, thinking they are better because they earn more. Consuming the wealth created by the common worker, loading the consumer with debt, and ruining the american economy in the process. Scum of the earth.
Do you know who gets hardest hit by these kind of wealth redistribution policies? The middle class, especially the upper middle class earning about twice the average income. The rich can easily vote with their feet and leave the country or hide their income if the tax rates go too high. The upper middle class is just at that threshold where they can't just up and leave but earn enough to pay significantly more. There's only so much "soak the rich" you can do. It also has a way of coming back to bite you in that capital investments tends to leave the country. This is what happened to manufacturing jobs. All that capital left the country.
And what are these other things you are talking about? How does the new law streamline health insurance? It's still health insurance. In fact it's even worse because there is an individual mandate. That's exactly what the insurance agencies wanted in a health care reform bill - a bait and switch for the ages. They got it in Massachusetts and it's an overwhelming boon for those insurance companies and their executives. Who's the person helping to balloon executive pay in this instance?
Blue collar work has lagged behind white collar work because there is no more capital investure in the US. When was the last time manufacturing plants were built or refitted with latest technology? White collar work is paying well because there is at least sufficient capital there. The disparity can be entirely explain by capital expenditures, but it looks like blue collar workers were too busy consuming to save or create capital.
And what is this about "rich" loading the consumers with debt? Consumers in their blissful ignorance did most of that themselves, thank you very much. People who earn more usually are better human beings than those that earn less. And there are two kinds of scum in the world - those who leech off of others at the top through their political connections and those who leech off of others at the bottom and live as ungrateful beggars on the kindness of others - silently wishing a pox on the houses of their benefactors.
Take your schadenfreude and shove it.
|
On November 13 2009 06:59 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2009 06:55 Undisputed- wrote:On November 13 2009 06:16 Stratos_speAr wrote:On November 13 2009 01:56 Undisputed- wrote:On November 13 2009 01:46 Stratos_speAr wrote:On November 12 2009 23:55 Undisputed- wrote:On November 12 2009 20:54 RoyW wrote:
It's almost as if the extensive post demonstrating that socialised healthcare, as it exists in other western nations, is not only vastly more economically sound that the free market implementation that exists in the US but produces better results and service on average than thge US, was completely ignored.
Aside from idealistic theory, can you produce some empirical evidence that shows that free-market for profit healthcare provides cheaper service while keeping the opportunity for all the populice to have obtainable access to health services.
Also, it has been shown that free-market healthcare lowers the rates at which people will attempt early diagnoses. Generally speaking, the later the diagnosis, the more expensive it is to treat a health problem. Whether this cost is handled by the government or insurance companies(which will be passed onto customers - see massive premium rise over past decade), is there any demonstration of how the free market would tackle this problem? Socialized health care is bad for America for a number of reasons from lack of choices, to poor quality, to waiting lines, to increase in government control over our lives. Socialized health care is un-American and unconstitutional. If you don't have insurance it is nobody's fault but your own, get your priorities straight.I believe Americans aren't so weak that they need the government to cling to. Why should the American taxpayer or anyone for that matter pay for you involuntarily? Socialized medicine might be ok for Euros and the Canadians. Their Constitutions don't guarantee freedom "under God". They have spent most of the last century preparing themselves for a master, and they are well suited for one. Stop throwing around bullshit phrases. Obviously "the American way" isn't working very well. Also, I can't believe you are trying to use religion in your argument at all. Religion is one of the leading promoters of ignorance and intolerance throughout history, and has absolutely no place in governing society. Oh, and if you think it's always the person's fault for not having something, then you are a spoiled, rich asshole that is completely clueless about actually having difficulties throughout life and you shouldn't have a place discussing how our government should be run either. I don't believe in religion, I put under god in quotes because for me I'll take that as humans have rights and freedoms they are inherently born with. Explain how the American way "isn't working well" and how an alternative would work better. I'm a spoiled, rich asshole because I have a job and pay for my own healthcare. K w/e. Then don't bring "Under God" into it at all. It doesn't imply anything special. Something that isn't completely free market doesn't automatically mean that it's going to take away all kinds of freedoms. A balance between individual freedoms and government control is needed. I consider myself very libertarian and even I believe this. Are you kidding? Obviously things aren't working well if the economy is in its current state and Congress considering this kind of overhaul of the healthcare system. You're a spoiled, rich, ignorant asshole because you believe that its always a person's fault if they are in economic troubles. Well, guess what, you are straight up WRONG, and the fact that you believe this shows just how ignorant you are. Ok so "things" aren't working well. Great. Taking the moral high ground is a cop out, try again. What is wrong, are people like you who demonize success almost as if it's a crime. I don't have a problem with people using welfare/medicaid type programs when times are rough. But there is a lot of dead weight in this country leeching and abusing public assistance programs beyond what they were meant for. Not to mention how the government can't even run the medicare/medicaid programs properly with astronomical levels of fraud (only about 5% of claims are audited). Going to trust them to run 1/6 of the US economy? No thanks. so instead of always talking about the negative how about people come up with other solutions. I swear conservatives bitch and moan about government intervention but then never come up with anything. They ignore the problems. On the odd occasion they do come up with something it almost never addresses the problem at all. I dont give a fuck who comes up with the solution if it works properly and everyone can receive healthcare/dental/optical as "needed."
I'm open to solutions that don't involve stealing or diminishing the quality of service that I have.
|
Ranting of political ideology = nothing.
Biggest problems in health care in the USA = overutilization due to profit motive and defensive medicine (Docs funcitoning as co-investors for private hospitals, taking payments in return for admitting patients. Doctors are 4x more likely to order services if they offer these services in their offices (profit motive yay!)... etc). Lack of readily available primary and preventative care (An estimated 52% of hospital visits occur because individuals cannot get a timely appointment wtih a primary care doc, and our feeble 33% of primary care docs is too weak compared to the 52 percent seen in other countries). Overspecialization (Specialist cost more, and more specialist does NOT correlate with better health care outcomes. More PRIMARY CARE doctors do). The cost of drugs is greater than anywhere else (Don't give me the B.S. pharma needs the money for research. Anyone whose actually looked at how the average pharma co. manages their funds knows this is horseshit. And don't even forget the BILLIONS of annual federal investments into orphan drug programs and scientific research that pharma benefits from) Excessive spending on end of life care (Other countries are much better at utilizing hospice facilities for end of life care). Lack of responsible laws governing the sale of pharmaceuticals and medical equipment (I get free lunch from a visiting pharm rep every time I go to a preceptor. Why the fuck do these people exist but to leech of our current system?). Lack of legisilation controling health care profits (Many countries limit the profit margins of drug and private insurance companies to 0.5-1% while they remain unbounded in the USA encouraging one thing, screwing as many people over as legally viable). Also we need to remove the influence of pharma and hospitals on Washington. These groups should not be able to make politcal contributions and legislators should not be allowed to invest in these institutions. This is illegal in most European countries. Why not the US you ask? Because we are retarded here if you haven't noticed.
Honestly health care is soo screwed up in the United States expanding it will only feed into a broken system that needs to be rebuilt from the bottom up. This is why I don't support the current legislation and neither does the AMA. Specifically we need completely restructured access, removal of the profit motive (like they do in the Mayo Clinic paying all docs a salary and remaining non-profit) - legally mandated creation of more primary care training programs - better utilization of end of life care - government negociated and controled drug prices and pharma/insurance profits - and death of the republican party who oppose everything related to sensible reform.
|
On November 13 2009 12:33 aRod wrote:
Ranting of political ideology = nothing.
Biggest problems in health care in the USA = overutilization due to profit motive and defensive medicine (Docs funcitoning as co-investors for private hospitals, taking payments in return for admitting patients. Doctors are 4x more likely to order services if they offer these services in their offices (profit motive yay!)... etc). Lack of readily available primary and preventative care (An estimated 52% of hospital visits occur because individuals cannot get a timely appointment wtih a primary care doc, and our feeble 33% of primary care docs is too weak compared to the 52 percent seen in other countries). Overspecialization (Specialist cost more, and more specialist does NOT correlate with better health care outcomes. More PRIMARY CARE doctors do). The cost of drugs is greater than anywhere else (Don't give me the B.S. pharma needs the money for research. Anyone whose actually looked at how the average pharma co. manages their funds knows this is horseshit. And don't even forget the BILLIONS of annual federal investments into orphan drug programs and scientific research that pharma benefits from) Excessive spending on end of life care (Other countries are much better at utilizing hospice facilities for end of life care). Lack of responsible laws governing the sale of pharmaceuticals and medical equipment (I get free lunch from a visiting pharm rep every time I go to a preceptor. Why the fuck do these people exist but to leech of our current system?). Lack of legisilation controling health care profits (Many countries limit the profit margins of drug and private insurance companies to 0.5-1% while they remain unbounded in the USA encouraging one thing, screwing as many people over as legally viable). Also we need to remove the influence of pharma and hospitals on Washington. These groups should not be able to make politcal contributions and legislators should not be allowed to invest in these institutions. This is illegal in most European countries. Why not the US you ask? Because we are retarded here if you haven't noticed.
Honestly health care is soo screwed up in the United States expanding it will only feed into a broken system that needs to be rebuilt from the bottom up. This is why I don't support the current legislation and neither does the AMA. Specifically we need completely restructured access, removal of the profit motive (like they do in the Mayo Clinic paying all docs a salary and remaining non-profit) - legally mandated creation of more primary care training programs - better utilization of end of life care - government negociated and controled drug prices and pharma/insurance profits - and death of the republican party who oppose everything related to sensible reform.
Problem is this still doesnt help people getting raped by health insurance currently. Why cant we have some sort of temporary fix while gradually shit gets put together.
|
Mystlord
United States10264 Posts
On November 13 2009 12:33 aRod wrote:
Ranting of political ideology = nothing.
Biggest problems in health care in the USA = overutilization due to profit motive and defensive medicine (Docs funcitoning as co-investors for private hospitals, taking payments in return for admitting patients. Doctors are 4x more likely to order services if they offer these services in their offices (profit motive yay!)... etc). Lack of readily available primary and preventative care (An estimated 52% of hospital visits occur because individuals cannot get a timely appointment wtih a primary care doc, and our feeble 33% of primary care docs is too weak compared to the 52 percent seen in other countries). Overspecialization (Specialist cost more, and more specialist does NOT correlate with better health care outcomes. More PRIMARY CARE doctors do). The cost of drugs is greater than anywhere else (Don't give me the B.S. pharma needs the money for research. Anyone whose actually looked at how the average pharma co. manages their funds knows this is horseshit. And don't even forget the BILLIONS of annual federal investments into orphan drug programs and scientific research that pharma benefits from) Excessive spending on end of life care (Other countries are much better at utilizing hospice facilities for end of life care). Lack of responsible laws governing the sale of pharmaceuticals and medical equipment (I get free lunch from a visiting pharm rep every time I go to a preceptor. Why the fuck do these people exist but to leech of our current system?). Lack of legisilation controling health care profits (Many countries limit the profit margins of drug and private insurance companies to 0.5-1% while they remain unbounded in the USA encouraging one thing, screwing as many people over as legally viable). Also we need to remove the influence of pharma and hospitals on Washington. These groups should not be able to make politcal contributions and legislators should not be allowed to invest in these institutions. This is illegal in most European countries. Why not the US you ask? Because we are retarded here if you haven't noticed.
Honestly health care is soo screwed up in the United States expanding it will only feed into a broken system that needs to be rebuilt from the bottom up. This is why I don't support the current legislation and neither does the AMA. Specifically we need completely restructured access, removal of the profit motive (like they do in the Mayo Clinic paying all docs a salary and remaining non-profit) - legally mandated creation of more primary care training programs - better utilization of end of life care - government negociated and controled drug prices and pharma/insurance profits - and death of the republican party who oppose everything related to sensible reform.
Yeah you hit most of the big ones, but I would condense your points down to five (six in my eyes) overreaching principles:
1. Incentives - Doctors are given more money for more tests or to prescribe certain drugs. This leads to unnecessary tests and examinations and doesn't lead to proper doctor-patient care as doctors now work on a test basis rather than a care basis.
2. Malpractice - They're costly, ruin reputations, aren't fair, and exact too much money for the stupidest things.
3. Drug costs - I don't think I need to explain this one. I would include drug patenting as a major cause of these high prices. Drug companies basically get a monopoly over a certain sector of drugs.
4. Specialization - Goes hand in hand with the incentives point. Primary care doctors are paid by the sheer number of patients they see. They have an upper limit to their profits depending on the (limited) number of patients they can see every day. Specialists also work off of this principle, but they also earn a higher wage because they're more valuable than primary care doctors and they aren't caught in a flood of external work like primary care doctors are (see next point). Thus people are attracted to becoming specialists rather than primary care doctors.
5. Paperwork - Too much paperwork. We don't have all patient information centralized like we should. Everytime you go to a new doctor, you have to get a new medical history, and stuff can get lost in transit. Plus, primary care doctors are inundated with paperwork as they have a ton to go through.
(6. Employer based health insurance - The most contentious of these problems, and views may vary, but I would argue that this destroys whatever semblance of "free market" there is in the health insurance industry. Consumers have no choice, thus health insurance companies have to incentive to attract new costumers.)
If we fix these problems, the rest would fall into place much, much more smoothly.
|
On November 13 2009 07:10 Foucault wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2009 06:39 Piretes wrote:On November 13 2009 02:02 TanGeng wrote:
Such pretensions of entitlement to other's fruits of labour is even more unbecoming than a spoiled brat that consumes his own wealth.
It is the attitude of spoiled brats that consumes other people's wealth. Yep, so the buisness elite with their so-called 'jobs' keeps earning exorbiant amounts, while the average working-class wage stagnates. Average blue-collar income has fallen far behind white-collar earnings, CEOs makes thousands of times more money than hard-working employees. Income balance is totally skewered in the U.S. People with normal jobs, working their asses of every day, can only just get by. But should one accident happen, they are fucked. Losing your job + some illness that requires drugs (fucking jacked up prices to pay executives) can bankrupt a family. Don't tell me the working class is going to suffer from a better, fairer health-care system. The rich and ultra-rich will. Spoiled brats as they are, thinking they are better because they earn more. Consuming the wealth created by the common worker, loading the consumer with debt, and ruining the american economy in the process. Scum of the earth. Yeah that's fine but what about the people who actually worked hard to get their money? Sounds like you are assuming that everyone that's rich is a douchebag
Just how hard exactly do you have to work to earn 10-200 times more than another hard working person? Sorry, i'm all for getting good pays for good work, but if someone is working his ass off for let's say 3000 credits and another one is working his ass off but has made some *smarter* decisions when choosing his carreer and is now earning 100'000 credits while not being better at his job as the other dude, something is wrong.
I'm all for better earnings for higher qualified people, but no one can tell me that there is any sane reasoning in any job on this entire world that justifies someone earning 15-1XX times more than the average employee of the same firm.
|
On November 13 2009 13:20 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2009 12:33 aRod wrote:
Ranting of political ideology = nothing.
Biggest problems in health care in the USA = overutilization due to profit motive and defensive medicine (Docs funcitoning as co-investors for private hospitals, taking payments in return for admitting patients. Doctors are 4x more likely to order services if they offer these services in their offices (profit motive yay!)... etc). Lack of readily available primary and preventative care (An estimated 52% of hospital visits occur because individuals cannot get a timely appointment wtih a primary care doc, and our feeble 33% of primary care docs is too weak compared to the 52 percent seen in other countries). Overspecialization (Specialist cost more, and more specialist does NOT correlate with better health care outcomes. More PRIMARY CARE doctors do). The cost of drugs is greater than anywhere else (Don't give me the B.S. pharma needs the money for research. Anyone whose actually looked at how the average pharma co. manages their funds knows this is horseshit. And don't even forget the BILLIONS of annual federal investments into orphan drug programs and scientific research that pharma benefits from) Excessive spending on end of life care (Other countries are much better at utilizing hospice facilities for end of life care). Lack of responsible laws governing the sale of pharmaceuticals and medical equipment (I get free lunch from a visiting pharm rep every time I go to a preceptor. Why the fuck do these people exist but to leech of our current system?). Lack of legisilation controling health care profits (Many countries limit the profit margins of drug and private insurance companies to 0.5-1% while they remain unbounded in the USA encouraging one thing, screwing as many people over as legally viable). Also we need to remove the influence of pharma and hospitals on Washington. These groups should not be able to make politcal contributions and legislators should not be allowed to invest in these institutions. This is illegal in most European countries. Why not the US you ask? Because we are retarded here if you haven't noticed.
Honestly health care is soo screwed up in the United States expanding it will only feed into a broken system that needs to be rebuilt from the bottom up. This is why I don't support the current legislation and neither does the AMA. Specifically we need completely restructured access, removal of the profit motive (like they do in the Mayo Clinic paying all docs a salary and remaining non-profit) - legally mandated creation of more primary care training programs - better utilization of end of life care - government negociated and controled drug prices and pharma/insurance profits - and death of the republican party who oppose everything related to sensible reform. Problem is this still doesnt help people getting raped by health insurance currently. Why cant we have some sort of temporary fix while gradually shit gets put together.
Because very few things the government does is temporary. Especially something as big as this overhaul.
|
On November 13 2009 07:32 TanGeng wrote:
Do you know who gets hardest hit by these kind of wealth redistribution policies? The middle class, especially the upper middle class earning about twice the average income. The rich can easily vote with their feet and leave the country or hide their income if the tax rates go too high. The upper middle class is just at that threshold where they can't just up and leave but earn enough to pay significantly more. There's only so much "soak the rich" you can do. It also has a way of coming back to bite you in that capital investments tends to leave the country. This is what happened to manufacturing jobs. All that capital left the country.
I can assure you that universal health-care will not scare very many rich people out of the country. Yes, it will hit the upper-middle class relatively harder, but it's in their interest on the long run. Especially the middle class, which earns much more than the threshold for social policies (Medicare etc) but not enough to shrug medical costs off, will benefit from fairer health-care. For the middle class, financial security is detereorating, as astronomical health-care costs are always around the corner, and job-loss/bankruptcy can happen fast when one finds himself very sick. At the moment, insurance is bad and expensive, and the state-option will break open the monopoly of local insurers, which doesn't solve everything, but at least helps.
On November 13 2009 07:32 TanGeng wrote:
And what are these other things you are talking about? How does the new law streamline health insurance? It's still health insurance. In fact it's even worse because there is an individual mandate. That's exactly what the insurance agencies wanted in a health care reform bill - a bait and switch for the ages. They got it in Massachusetts and it's an overwhelming boon for those insurance companies and their executives. Who's the person helping to balloon executive pay in this instance?
I wasn't specifically talking about the bill itself, but about your snobbish assumption that everyone who seeks help is a grabby, selfish child. I'm not a big proponent of the bill, and to be fair I don't know many of the details, but I think change is needed.
On November 13 2009 07:32 TanGeng wrote:
Blue collar work has lagged behind white collar work because there is no more capital investure in the US. When was the last time manufacturing plants were built or refitted with latest technology? White collar work is paying well because there is at least sufficient capital there. The disparity can be entirely explain by capital expenditures, but it looks like blue collar workers were too busy consuming to save or create capital.
And what is this about "rich" loading the consumers with debt? Consumers in their blissful ignorance did most of that themselves, thank you very much. People who earn more usually are better human beings than those that earn less. And there are two kinds of scum in the world - those who leech off of others at the top through their political connections and those who leech off of others at the bottom and live as ungrateful beggars on the kindness of others - silently wishing a pox on the houses of their benefactors.
Take your schadenfreude and shove it.
The US is hurtling down a road to bankruptcy, partly because of the sick american consumerist ideal (always wanting more, even if it is above your means) that is prodded along by buisness elites, and because of the ever widening gap between the lower-class and the elites. What happens when the consumer is totally overloaded with debt? Everything crashes, after a while a new cycle begins (with even more debt).
I know that this seems hopeless, and it actually gets close to being so, thanks to the stubbornness of people like you. The system of corporation-dominated quasi free-market capitalism is not going to last long like this, but it'll first ruin alot of American lives.
|
United Kingdom2674 Posts
On November 13 2009 17:00 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2009 07:10 Foucault wrote:On November 13 2009 06:39 Piretes wrote:On November 13 2009 02:02 TanGeng wrote:
Such pretensions of entitlement to other's fruits of labour is even more unbecoming than a spoiled brat that consumes his own wealth.
It is the attitude of spoiled brats that consumes other people's wealth. Yep, so the buisness elite with their so-called 'jobs' keeps earning exorbiant amounts, while the average working-class wage stagnates. Average blue-collar income has fallen far behind white-collar earnings, CEOs makes thousands of times more money than hard-working employees. Income balance is totally skewered in the U.S. People with normal jobs, working their asses of every day, can only just get by. But should one accident happen, they are fucked. Losing your job + some illness that requires drugs (fucking jacked up prices to pay executives) can bankrupt a family. Don't tell me the working class is going to suffer from a better, fairer health-care system. The rich and ultra-rich will. Spoiled brats as they are, thinking they are better because they earn more. Consuming the wealth created by the common worker, loading the consumer with debt, and ruining the american economy in the process. Scum of the earth. Yeah that's fine but what about the people who actually worked hard to get their money? Sounds like you are assuming that everyone that's rich is a douchebag Just how hard exactly do you have to work to earn 10-200 times more than another hard working person? Sorry, i'm all for getting good pays for good work, but if someone is working his ass off for let's say 3000 credits and another one is working his ass off but has made some *smarter* decisions when choosing his carreer and is now earning 100'000 credits while not being better at his job as the other dude, something is wrong. I'm all for better earnings for higher qualified people, but no one can tell me that there is any sane reasoning in any job on this entire world that justifies someone earning 15-1XX times more than the average employee of the same firm.
I have to concur. I am often bemused by the continuing insistence by some that there is a systematic link between "hard work" and "remuneration". Even a cursory glance at societies and economies shows this to be complete nonsense. Now it is obviously the case that some people work very hard and earn a lot money yet there are innumerably more who slave their entire working life for very little, even in the wealthiest countries just as there is a significant number who do very little work and yet who receive massive monetary rewards due to simple good fortune.
As far as I can see the "reward for hard work" framework is an ideological weapon, the main aim of which is to justify massive and morally dubious inequalities in wealth. Unfortunately, it has been internalised to such an extent that many people cannot really see what is in fact right in front of their eyes.
To my mind, anyone who truly believes in appropriate reward for hard work and effort should despise the American (and British) economic systems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
