EPTThe Affordable Healthcare Act in the U.S. Supreme Court -…
| Forum Index > General Forum |
This topic is not about the American Invasion of Iraq. Stop. - Page 23 | ||
|
scaban84
United States1080 Posts
| ||
|
Lockitupv2
United States496 Posts
On March 23 2012 23:48 PassiveAce wrote: "Obamacare" is a mediocre compromise imo. I dont like the idea of the government forcing us to buy health insurance from a private company, if we all have to buy it then shouldn't the government run it so we have control over it instead of a private company? Universal healthcare is the way to go. No, everything the government does is terrible when compared (and even by itself) to anything a private company can do. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10777 Posts
Obamacare sucks because Reps (and undoubtly some Dems) did not want a real universal healthcare system. Now this leads to the fun fact, that the Reps (and some Dems) attack Obamacare for being inefficient while they themselves where the ones responsible for this bad compromise? Politics at it's best! | ||
fidelity
Sweden410 Posts
On March 23 2012 23:54 Lockitupv2 wrote: No, everything the government does is terrible when compared (and even by itself) to anything a private company can do. Why would you say that? USA wouldn't have been on the moon for example, if not for the government. The problem with private health care is that the focus of the company is to maximize profit, not to give the best possible care. That becomes a problem for people who doesn't have the money to go to the best hospitals. | ||
|
Lockitupv2
United States496 Posts
On March 24 2012 00:01 fidelity wrote: Why would you say that? USA wouldn't have been on the moon for example, if not for the government. The problem with private health care is that the focus of the company is to maximize profit, not to give the best possible care. That becomes a problem for people who doesn't have the money to go to the best hospitals. Hahaha Who do you think made the parts to the space shuttle? Actually its the other way, you maximize profits by giving the best care. | ||
|
zocktol
Germany1928 Posts
On March 23 2012 23:55 Velr wrote: Isn't the problem like: Obamacare sucks because Reps (and undoubtly some Dems) did not want a real universal healthcare system. Now this leads to the fun fact, that the Reps (and some Dems) attack Obamacare for being inefficient while they themselves where the ones responsible for this bad compromise? Politics at it's best! That seems to be the problem with most goverment politics and a integral mistake with Democracy nowadays, in my eyes. People that have no idea, about a subject but have a ideology, are making uninformed decisions or destroying smart concepts, because they are told to by the head of the party. Ah how i wish we would transcend to goverments, where people who know about science are responsible for science and so on. Up unitl that point, we are all doomed :D | ||
|
SySLeif
United States123 Posts
On March 24 2012 00:01 fidelity wrote: Why would you say that? USA wouldn't have been on the moon for example, if not for the government. The problem with private health care is that the focus of the company is to maximize profit, not to give the best possible care. That becomes a problem for people who doesn't have the money to go to the best hospitals. Your actually wrong, because if you give bad service, then no one will come to you to get care. That's how a true market works. The consumer picks where they want to go. Another problem with your statement, the United States has some of the highest regulations and restrictions to become a doctor and practice the profession in the world. The real problem is a few things, first being tort reform. Estimated to save 27% on healthcare costs by the Congressional Budget Office. So what's the problem? Most the people in political positions are lawyers, and you guessed it, lawyers make tons of money off frivolous lawsuits each year. Another problem is the amount of overweight, unhealthy lifestyles that people in America live by. It was estimated that 70% of costs in the U.S. healthcare system are self induced by smoking and living unhealthy lifestyles (Wikimed). EDIT: If your too poor to see a doctor the government already pays for you to. So people who say that we are inhumane for not giving care to people who are dying, well your dead wrong. Learn the system before you criticize it. | ||
|
zocktol
Germany1928 Posts
On March 24 2012 00:06 Lockitupv2 wrote: Hahaha Who do you think made the parts to the space shuttle? Actually its the other way, you maximize profits by giving the best care. Could you explain how you mean that, because i think that that is not a correct idea. At least it seems counterintuitive, because the most modern practices are often really expensive. | ||
|
Adila
United States874 Posts
On March 24 2012 00:07 SySLeif wrote: Your actually wrong, because if you give bad service, then no one will come to you to get care. That's how a true market works. The consumer picks where they want to go. Another problem with your statement, the United States has some of the highest regulations and restrictions to become a doctor and practice the profession in the world. The real problem is a few things, first being tort reform. Estimated to save 27% on healthcare costs by the Congressional Budget Office. So what's the problem? Most the people in political positions are lawyers, and you guessed it, lawyers make tons of money off frivolous lawsuits each year. Another problem is the amount of overweight, unhealthy lifestyles that people in America live by. It was estimated that 70% of costs in the U.S. healthcare system are self induced by smoking and living unhealthy lifestyles (Wikimed). EDIT: If your too poor to see a doctor the government already pays for you to. So people who say that we are inhumane for not giving care to people who are dying, well your dead wrong. Learn the system before you criticize it. I have never heard of this "27%" savings from Tort Reform. The number I've always seen is around 0.2%. Do you have a link for this 27% number? | ||
|
RetroAspect
Belgium219 Posts
On March 23 2012 23:54 scaban84 wrote: Obvious foreigner skew here in the poll. Yeah i was thinking the same, but for the opposite reason probably  Seriously im shocked that soo many are against it, i had expected it to be 90% in favor | ||
|
Lockitupv2
United States496 Posts
On March 24 2012 00:09 zocktol wrote: Could you explain how you mean that, because i think that that is not a correct idea. At least it seems counterintuitive, because the most modern practices are often really expensive. The post above yours does a fair job of explaining. Take a restaurant for example. You order a steak, you're a steak kind of guy. However when you get the food, you bite into the worst steak you ever had. Why would you ever return to that restaurant, they server terrible steaks!? How would they make money when people dont even come back? Take the opposite. You get a great steak, it could be the best you ever had. You would love to return to that restaurant. Now for the high costs, its because patients actually dont care about the costs because insurance pays for it. People are much better at spending their own money then they are with other peoples. The only reason why "omg this treatment is so expensive" exists is because doctors and medical staff dont have to care about competition or even have to think about lowering costs. | ||
|
WeeKeong
United States282 Posts
On March 24 2012 00:17 RetroAspect wrote: Yeah i was thinking the same, but for the opposite reason probably Seriously im shocked that soo many are against it, i had expected it to be 90% in favor I had expected it to be 90% against... I have lost faith in humanity... | ||
|
ThatBronyGuy
United States169 Posts
I believe I have heard in other news reports that there is a decline in doctors in the U.S. further escalating times to be seen or even to make an check up appointment. More doctors have gotten out of their practices as well as a result of the new law, and there has been an increase in the number of people added to the system further creating a glut. Instead, my opinion is that people have a right to Health and their health must be maintained first and foremost by themselves. I think there has been a prevailing thought that people can just do anything they want and others are going to be willing to fix their problems and fit the bill, too. If you want to have proper health, you have to begin taking care of yourself and do what you have to do to get there, not rely on someone else to carry you to that point. In addition, I don't believe it's constitutional for any form of government to tell you what you have to buy and punishes you if you don't. It's not fair to think you have to follow a directive just for the fact that you're breathing. | ||
|
Cloud9157
United States2968 Posts
On March 23 2012 16:32 Kuja wrote: How about watching where your walking and not tripping in the first place? problem solved. Its this sort of thinking that makes me feel sick. No fucking empathy in the world. Thats like saying "Always keep your eyes on the road and watch your surroundings!" While in fact, if everyone did that, there would be no need for car insurance, it is in human nature to err. I guess accidents cannot be accounted for since everyone wants to be a selfish asshole. Good stuff. | ||
|
Lockitupv2
United States496 Posts
On March 24 2012 00:37 Cloud9157 wrote: Its this sort of thinking that makes me feel sick. No fucking empathy in the world. Thats like saying "Always keep your eyes on the road and watch your surroundings!" While in fact, if everyone did that, there would be no need for car insurance, it is in human nature to err. It 'saved' you money because other people helped pay for the consequences of your sisters drinking habits. Dont get me wrong, insurance has a place, and I do feel bad for your sister, but it feel its wrong that some has to help pay for it. Theres human error and then theres stuff drunk people do. I wouldnt mix the 2. | ||
|
Akta
447 Posts
On March 23 2012 23:20 Lockitupv2 wrote: Watched the first video and it doesn't make much or any sense. Probably would have been smarter to attack it by arguing that people would be more careful and stuff if they had to pay. I assume those effects are marginal but at least it would make more sense.I would recommended this video to everyone. And the this 6 part video There seem to be major efficiency problems with the US healthcare and something must cause it though. | ||
|
VTPerfect
United States487 Posts
| ||
|
FallDownMarigold
United States3710 Posts
On March 23 2012 23:54 Lockitupv2 wrote: No, everything the government does is terrible when compared (and even by itself) to anything a private company can do. What about maintaining a military capable of defending the nation on all fronts around the globe and in all scenarios? What about maintaining the ability to convey foreign policy that avoids wars, promotes trade and growth, etc? "Companys" would do all this stuff better than the gov? Im confused | ||
|
Lockitupv2
United States496 Posts
On March 24 2012 00:46 Akta wrote: Watched the first video and it doesn't make much or any sense. Probably would have been smarter to attack it by arguing that people would be more careful and stuff if they had to pay. I assume those effects are marginal but at least it would make more sense. There seem to be major efficiency problems with the US healthcare and something must cause it though. How does it make any sense to you, what do you think doesnt make sense? | ||
|
Miyoshino
314 Posts
On March 24 2012 00:17 RetroAspect wrote: Yeah i was thinking the same, but for the opposite reason probably Seriously im shocked that soo many are against it, i had expected it to be 90% in favor Indeed, if the Belgium, Swedish or Swiss government tried to pass a health care system that is so bureaocratic, gives private companies huge powers and doesn't really solve any of the health care regulation problems, there will be riots. Obamacare is a bad system. You need universal publicly paid covering for sure as a minimum. Most non US people who voted voted against this for this reason. So did I..I am actually very surprised that so many people are in favour of Obamacare. Right wing so-called conservatives in the US opposite it. The shattered and non-organized left wing in the US opposite it. Foreigenrs would opposite it. Then we only have some US middle of the road Obama lovers left who would vote in favour of it. When Fox news shows a poll on how many oppose Obamacare, many of the oppose votes are disappointed Obama voters who see how well some of the European systems are doing and are confused why the US isn't good enough to deserve such a system as well. | ||
| ||
