4/7/2012 8:27:08 AM

Quote :

"the supreme court justices know shit about paying for healthcare."

And how does that matter at all when trying to determine if it is constitutional?

You really want to chase that rabbit?

4/7/2012 8:41:12 AM

^doing anything good for people is unconstitutional. how the hell do you suggest i get coverage for my preexisting condition if i were to ever lose my job??? does the supreme court understand that since they are getting guaranteed health care for life?

also, how about you stop paying social security taxes, since it must be unconstitutional to make people save for their retirement...

^^you want Obama to get you a job? There are a few jobs in Afghanistan if you're interested in government employment... and stop bloating this thread with re-posts.

[Edited on April 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM. Reason : ...]

4/7/2012 3:14:28 PM

I think your anger is misplaced.

But what do I know? I'm just the village idiot, right? You've got this shit all figured out....

4/7/2012 4:45:03 PM

there is a lot of misplaced anger at the president, probably driven by racism.

the economy was artificially inflated for the past decade, propped up by idiots buying houses...and now everyone assumes things can be solved overnight...

4/7/2012 5:12:57 PM

I was talking about the Supreme Court, not the President.

4/7/2012 6:06:29 PM

^^ do you even know why housing prices were so high?

4/7/2012 9:04:48 PM

whitehouse says GSA debacle is (not surprisingly) bush's fault.

4/7/2012 9:10:17 PM

Quote :

"^doing anything good for people is unconstitutional."

Good, sound, rational arguement


btw, I would LOVE to stop paying SS taxes. It is a bad deal for everyone who actually pays into it. (esp our generation)

It sounds like you should just become a justice of the supreme court so you wouldnt have to worry about your health insurance.

All jokes aside kid, you understand where the unconstitutional arguement is coming from? It isnt from racist idiots who just want everyone to die as you seem to think.

[Edited on April 7, 2012 at 9:48 PM. Reason : .]

4/7/2012 9:46:43 PM

^sure, lets just pretend that we arent paying for all the uninsured when they show up to an ER...

either way, everyone is getting healthcare right now. it's just a very inefficient, expensive system...

i don't completely agree with Obama's healthcare plan, but at least he's trying to reform a broken system.

4/7/2012 10:33:05 PM

Quote :

"^sure, lets just pretend that we arent paying for all the uninsured when they show up to an ER... either way, everyone is getting healthcare right now. it's just a very inefficient, expensive system..."

I wonder what opponents of health reform have to say to this. It's not like we as a society would or even should just let sick people die.

If we're paying anyway, why doesn't it make sense to have an organized predictable framework?

The insurance mandate should fail, it's dumb for us to cede so much power and control of our society to unaccountable private corporations. But we still need to bring some sanity to the problem of our old people, and uninsured.

4/7/2012 10:43:45 PM

I saw it somewhere, but couldn't find it. For the federal government to actually pay every single unpaid emergency room bill in the country would have cost a fraction of what obamacare is going to cost.

4/8/2012 12:24:46 AM

^so i guess i should stop paying for insurance and just go to the ER when my tummy hurts...

4/8/2012 12:53:25 AM

4/8/2012 2:55:50 AM

Quote :

"how the hell do you suggest i get coverage for my preexisting condition if i were to ever lose my job???"

pretty simple. we decouple insurance from employment and then the problem doesn't exist any more!




also, -5000 for saying Augusta National should admit women and making a big deal about it. mind your own fucking business

Quote :

"I wonder what opponents of health reform have to say to this."

who is opposed to reform? I don't think there's many people out there who don't want reform.

Quote :

"sure, lets just pretend that we arent paying for all the uninsured when they show up to an ER..."

Sure. let's also just pretend that this fact isn't due to a law that congress passed that led to this fucked up system. Only a liberal would cheer the passing of a law that fucks up the market beyond belief and then blame the market

Quote :

"typical response from people like you. attacking a person instead of discussing the issue."

what the fuck was there to discuss? you were bitching and moaning that the Supreme Court is behaving the way the Constitution sets out, then bitching that the makeup of the Supreme Court was derived by the way the Constitution sets out. Stupidity like that SHOULD be called out.

[Edited on April 8, 2012 at 2:19 PM. Reason : ]

4/8/2012 2:12:52 PM

Quote :

"Sure. let's also just pretend that this fact isn't due to a law that congress passed that led to this fucked up system. Only a liberal would cheer the passing of a law that fucks up the market beyond belief and then blame the market"

What law are you referring to?

Do you suggest that hospitals would let people die at their doorsteps if it weren't for congress? I don't think this is how it would work in the US, how it's ever worked, and i'd be very disheartened if this was the case.

4/8/2012 2:32:42 PM

the laws that force hospitals to treat EVERYONE, regardless of any ability to pay. do I think hospitals would just let people die? of course not. But I'd bet they'd be turning away people with the sniffles if they could.

4/8/2012 2:34:35 PM

^^^

Quote :

"historically, conservatives felt that "unelected judges shouldn't be making national policy unless a case, on constitutional grounds, is really clear, that something is clearly unconstitutional. Otherwise, it should be left to the political branches.""

The court is arguing a law that has been passed by elected officials and now we have activist judges trying to overturn laws.

There is nothing stupid about my bitching. The way you're calling out of my comments is the reason TWW is dying. No one feels like expressing their damn opinion with a bunch of conservatives stroking each other off in these threads.

^Everyone needs health insurance unless you believe we should go back to medieval times...uninsured need to see a doctor routinely, stopping some people from showing up to an ER isn't going to solve anything because they'll eventually get sick to the point of having a real emergency.

Btw, Romney said the same shit abut Augusta but I guess you're too busy hating the president.

[Edited on April 8, 2012 at 3:00 PM. Reason : .]

4/8/2012 2:47:52 PM

^^ it's extremely silly and naive to think that has any real significant bearing on health care problems.

4/8/2012 3:24:23 PM

Quote :

"There is nothing stupid about my bitching. "

There's EVERYTHING stupid about it. You are bitching that the Supreme Court is doing its fucking job.


^ really? You don't think that hospitals being forced to accept people who have no intention of paying is a problem? You must not have been paying attention when other people were saying it WAS a huge problem. You must not have been paying attention during the arguments in front of the Supreme Court where discussions were taking place about exactly that

4/8/2012 3:29:41 PM

Quote :

"“I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.”"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review

And the man was a constitutional law professor...

4/8/2012 4:42:12 PM

It's just politics.

4/8/2012 4:46:53 PM

Yeah, just trying to talk a big game.

I'm far from conservative but this is a legitimate review by the Supreme Court. Well within their power to question it. Look back at a lot of the New Deal legislation that got struck down by the Supreme Court in the 30's.

4/8/2012 4:57:39 PM

and how was it passed by a "strong majority?" it barely made it past the senate!

4/8/2012 5:06:09 PM

We, employed people, are already forced to pay for Social Security. How is making sure everyone has health insurance any different?

4/8/2012 5:45:09 PM

you're right, it isn't different. we shouldn't be forced to pay into a gov't-run Ponzi Scheme, either.

4/8/2012 5:47:34 PM

It is different. Social Security is a tax, which has been established as constitutional. The issue here is if the government should be able to force you to purchase a service.

I mean, the government can kill you without a warrant or a trial, put you jail for victimless crimes, and manipulate nearly every aspect of the economy. In that context, I don't think this is too much of a stretch, but it is different.

4/8/2012 6:09:58 PM

^ medicare payroll tax is already a mandated tax for a service...either way, it's forcing idiots to do something that is good for them.

Quote :

"Ginsburg brought up Social Security as an example, likening it to a government old-age annuity that everyone is forced to purchase. "It just seems very strange to me that there's no question we can have a Social Security system (despite) all the people who say: 'I'm being forced to pay for something I don't want,'" she said. "There's something very odd about that, that the government can take over the whole thing and we all say, 'Oh, yes that's fine,' but if the government wants to ... preserve private insurers, it can't do that." Kennedy mused that Congress could have created a Medicare-style program for the uninsured, run exclusively by the government without the involvement of private insurers. ... "It's so crazy to think that a society that has Social Security and Medicare would not find this (law) constitutional," said MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, who advised both the Obama administration and Massachusetts lawmakers as they developed the state mandate in the 2006 law that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney championed as governor."

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501705_162-57407892/obamas-insurance-requirement-not-the-only-mandate/

So all Obama has to do is get a bill that expands medicare coverage to uninsured.

[Edited on April 8, 2012 at 6:39 PM. Reason : adding link]

4/8/2012 6:38:36 PM

Quote :

"medicare payroll tax is already a mandated tax for a service...either way, it's forcing idiots to do something that is good for them. "

mandated tax. not a mandated private service. you are too dense to understand the difference

4/8/2012 7:36:39 PM

Quote :

"^^ it's extremely silly and naive to think that has any real significant bearing on health care problems."

Are you suggesting that hospitals having to see anyone for any reason is not significant to health care costs? wow. Im sure if we had car companies that would have to fix your car or give you a new one if you wrecked at no cost to yourself, no one would stop paying for their car insurance.

Quote :

"sure, lets just pretend that we arent paying for all the uninsured when they show up to an ER... either way, everyone is getting healthcare right now. it's just a very inefficient, expensive system..."

You fellas need to learn some history. Ok so Hospitals (some) have to see anyone regardless of their complaint or ability to pay. So people start using the ERs for nonemergent care. Costs rise. So people complain how the uninsured are using the ERs for routine care and it is costing taxpayers too much. (sound familar? Its the same shit they are saying TODAY) So the "solution" was to give "free" insurance to the majority of these people and we will SAVE (yep, actually said that) money bc now they will go to private practices and cost taxapayers 50 dollars for a visit vs 500. Sounds great....on paper. What these morons ignored and CONTINUE to do so is the cost to that individual is still ZERO. So many people who had a moral objection to getting service they knew they couldnt pay for suddenly got that lifted by their "free" insurance and guess what happened? ER visits for routine care INCREASED...shocker. Now medicaid is the top or top 2 expense for just about every state, and rising.

So now faced with the SAME DAMN PROBLEM the solution is to try to get more people free or subsidized insurance? This is like hitting the iceberg with the other side of the titanic thinking it will fix things. It is basic economics, the less one pays for a valued good or service the more they will consume. Just like it did in the 60s this will only increase DEMAND and the costs to those who actually have to foot the bill, plus all the extra subsidies that were created to SAVE the taxpayer money.

4/8/2012 8:13:09 PM

^^when you make someone pay for a future service such a social security it's the same as making people get an immediate service such as healthcare. calling it a service or a tax is just semantics.

by the way if a person opts out of getting the service, guess what happens, they pay a penalty to the IRS (sounds like a tax to me).

either way the current healthcare system is failing and way too expensive and you don't have a decent idea on how to fix it. well, except for making hospitals turn away uninsured and that would solve everything.

^the countries with universal healthcare don't spend more person than the US currently does:


[Edited on April 8, 2012 at 9:12 PM. Reason : ..]

4/8/2012 9:03:33 PM

^so as our govt has taken over a larger share of health care you think things have gotten better? You think MORE of this is the answer? The two most heavily subsidized industries have the highest rate of price increase....education and healthcare. interesting huh

Quote :

"^the countries with universal healthcare don't spend more person than the US currently does"

And it costs less to not go to disney than going to disney. Whats new? The CITY of chicago has more MRIs than ALL OF CANADA.

4/8/2012 11:52:34 PM

Quote :

"so as our govt has taken over a larger share of health care you think things have gotten better? You think MORE of this is the answer? The two most heavily subsidized industries have the highest rate of price increase....education and healthcare. interesting huh"

This is the most stupid fucking argument ever. "Well, ever since government got into the healthcare business the costs have gone up so it MUST be their fault." Correlation =/= causation. That's some Day 1 shit. You have to prove by what mechanism this has occurred. In the case of every single first world country on the planet, their government-run healthcare is more efficient than our system. Does it make sense if I make the sole claim that our more private than all other countries' healthcare system is a result of the private sector fucking things up? Well, using every other country as an example would certainly back my case up but this is still a very lazy argument. It's also the same argument you made only without any data to back you up.

Our system is basically an incestuous clusterfuck of private healthcare industries shitting in the mouths of the private insurance companies. The private insurance companies then shit into the mouths of the consumer, who is effectively made the caboose of this free market human centipede. These businesses have the complicit permission of the government to do all this, but it's not actually the government creating the situation. Don't conflate big government with bad government. They are not the same thing.

4/9/2012 2:32:18 AM

Quote :

"What these morons ignored and CONTINUE to do so is the cost to that individual is still ZERO. So many people who had a moral objection to getting service they knew they couldnt pay for suddenly got that lifted by their "free" insurance and guess what happened? ER visits for routine care INCREASED...shocker. Now medicaid is the top or top 2 expense for just about every state, and rising."

People don't understand public choice theory. Incentives matter. Moral hazard exists. Rent seeking is alive and well.

If you ignore these very basic aspects of human behavior, then modern economics will be a complete mystery to you, like it is to most in this thread and on this message board.

The absurd argument I hear time and time again is that, if you make something free, people won't take advantage of it, or at least not to any significant degree.

An alternate argument, which is about as insane, is that people will take advantage of free services, but in the unique case of health care, this is a good thing. Somehow, even with the price set far below equilibrium market price, free health care will eventually "pay itself off", because people will be healthier. This will have the effect of bringing prices down.

Unfortunately, the latter argument ignores population-wide trends. Free doctor visits, tests, and hospital visits will not make people stop eating too much. It will not making people stop smoking. It will not make people exercise. It will not make people stop abusing drugs and alcohol. What it will do is drive up the the real price of doctors/hospitals in the near-term, with the nebulous expectation that the cost of health care will begin to go down, or stop going up as fast, in a few generations.

4/9/2012 10:33:47 AM

Quote :

"Don't conflate big government with bad government."

And why not? Can you seriously name ONE program the govt more more efficiently than the private sector? The fact you mentioned healthcare is laughable.

Lets see govt keeps mandating that insurance companies HAVE to provide X services (regardless if people want/need them)= prices go up. (then blame free market) Govt then restricts competition across state borders =prices go up. (blame free market) Govt creates a massive drug plan =prices go up for those who have to buy their own drugs AND taxes to cover the new program for the recipients. Govts push to expand medicaid roles AND coverage into luxuries (ie braces, color contacts) = costs to the providers increase. Medical technology/procedures developed here is used overseas first to avoid lawsuits. Govt links employment with health insurance = costs rise as demand rises (as cost to individual are less), also the fear of not getting insurance fi you develop an illness and change jobs. Or we can just look directly at subsidies. Our govt continues to subsidies this and other industries (bc cutting these back would be cruel) but the effectiveness and lack of efficiency cannot be overlooked. IN education alone as the subsidides rose so did education costs with similar results. IN fact around 50% of people entering never finish that 4 yr program in 6 years. So roughly half of people in schools really dont belong there, but attendence is artifically high bc of govt intervention. I use this example to illustrate the same thing going on in health care. Exact same shit happened to housing. Oh but lets not confuse BIG govt with bad govt. As if they are all knowing.

Simply look at non covered services to see the kind of improvement and lowering of costs that other industries with competition have. LASIK has made great leaps and have lowered or maintained costs. Same with plastic surgery. Hell if the govt "helped" the cell phone industry we would all be carrying the zach morris and costing 5x as much. Dont think so? Our energy policy has basically remained the same for how many decades? And has cost how many Trillions? Money well spent...but lets not confuse BIG govt vs bad govt. Just on a practical/political arguement, lets say you get your wish and have an all powerful govt that can even tell you how many times a day you can piss. What happens when someone gets into power you dont like and does things that are harmful to you? Lowers your standard of living? That utopia doesnt exist. You are better off with YOU having more control over your life than politician you have never met and doenst give two shits about you....oh but he was soooo funny on the daily show... haha

^exactly. It is just basic economics. Everyone of you have had a relative or friend you have at least heard them say, "Ive met my deductible this year so Im going to have x, y, z done before next year." What this is saying is that I want X, Y, Z but I am unwilling to use my own money to pay for these things. Thus driving up the costs to who actually pays the bills. If the govt offered to buy everyone a car for free, how many people would drive to the KIA lot over BMW, Lexus, Mercedes? Only natural

[Edited on April 9, 2012 at 10:48 AM. Reason : .]

4/9/2012 10:44:01 AM

^very well said.

It's pretty telling that a lot of people in this thread remember little about the USSR during the cold war.

4/9/2012 11:02:51 AM

Quote :

"^exactly. It is just basic economics. Everyone of you have had a relative or friend you have at least heard them say, "Ive met my deductible this year so Im going to have x, y, z done before next year." What this is saying is that I want X, Y, Z but I am unwilling to use my own money to pay for these things. Thus driving up the costs to who actually pays the bills. If the govt offered to buy everyone a car for free, how many people would drive to the KIA lot over BMW, Lexus, Mercedes? Only natural"

Shit, I've said that. Once you hit your deductible, you might as well knock out as many tests and specialist visits as you can.

4/9/2012 11:03:07 AM

^^^
You realize that pretty much all the problems you describe are due to corporate lobbyists, or systems that cloves naturally from the private actor?

None of those were the development of progressive governing. Just look at the current health reform bill. The worst parts of it are due directly to compromise with conservatives to gut the elements that benefit the public because somehow blindly supporting the private sector must be the right thing to do.

And perhaps you were being facetious but modern medicine wouldn't exist without government funded research, that's one thing the gov does better than the private sector. It's hilarious you take for granted th luxuries of our country that most people around the world clamor for.

4/9/2012 11:26:59 AM

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/04/09/white-house-basketballs-emblazoned-image/



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~NEWS FLASH!!!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder#Diagnosis

Quote :

"The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fourth edition, DSM IV-TR, a widely used manual for diagnosing mental disorders, defines narcissistic personality disorder (in Axis II Cluster B) as: A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following: 1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements) 2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love 3. Believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions) 4. Requires excessive admiration 5. Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations 6. Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends 7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others 8. Is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her 9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes"

4/9/2012 2:53:15 PM

Quote :

" It's hilarious you take for granted th luxuries of our country that most people around the world clamor for. "

Wait, I thought we had the worst of everything?

Our nation flourished largely because we had a limited government that allowed the nation to use its individual talents.

And are you seriously suggesting that medicine would not have advanced without govt? Say that outloud a couple times. I know this might sound shocking to you but if people were allowed to keep that money, many would choose to donate it to groups who do research. St. Judes, Komen foundation. (and that is AFTER taxes)

4/9/2012 3:00:50 PM

Quote :

"People don't understand public choice theory. Incentives matter. Moral hazard exists. Rent seeking is alive and well."

I totally agree that rational thought leads you to this. I'm not arguing this.

Quote :

"The absurd argument I hear time and time again is that, if you make something free, people won't take advantage of it, or at least not to any significant degree."

I never hear this. The whole point of having access to healthcare is to have the option to use it. Let the people who run the ER send the person with an earache to the back of the line and wait. I don't give a fuck, maybe they'll learn not to go for frivolous problems. I understand that seeing a specialist might take a little bit longer, but the goal is to increase total access to healthcare and to lower the per capita cost.

Medical costs are inflated because private insurance doesn't pay out the total claim amount so hospitals have to inflate prices to cover costs. You argue that this is the government's doing. I argue that it's the insurance companies ripping off their customers by not providing a service that has been paid for so that they can increase profits 12% over the same quarter last year. You cannot deny that money is extracted from the healthcare industry through profit. Quite a bit of money too. I have no idea how much but I guarantee you it's a lot.

You say you have moral issues of paying for other people's healthcare. Well I have moral issues with private companies generating maximum revenue from services that hugely impact quality of life and save lives. Who's right? I'm not saying I'm right by the way, I'm just stating where we go apart on the issue.

Quote :

"An alternate argument, which is about as insane, is that people will take advantage of free services, but in the unique case of health care, this is a good thing. Somehow, even with the price set far below equilibrium market price, free health care will eventually "pay itself off", because people will be healthier. This will have the effect of bringing prices down. Unfortunately, the latter argument ignores population-wide trends. Free doctor visits, tests, and hospital visits will not make people stop eating too much. It will not making people stop smoking. It will not make people exercise. It will not make people stop abusing drugs and alcohol. What it will do is drive up the the real price of doctors/hospitals in the near-term, with the nebulous expectation that the cost of health care will begin to go down, or stop going up as fast, in a few generations."

Again, I think increasing overall access to healthcare is an important goal. You may or may not. Personally, I think if people went to the doctor more often and were told that eating a dozen doughnuts every day is going to cause diabetes or eating too much fast food is causing high blood pressure, people might be inclined to stop. Not all people, but some. Unfortunately, many of the most at risk people for these diseases are low-income people who cannot afford access to healthcare. Personally, I think healthcare services are fairly effective. So yes, I think increasing access to healthcare would make people healthier which would reduce overall cost.

Very likely, it would pay off for most people. The only people who might not directly benefit are the people who paid more into it than they get out of it. Why should they be forced to pay into a system that they derive no benefit from? I guess I'd say it's a small price to pay for living in a society that creates so much wealth and allows for them to live the lifestyle they do. But they would also get indirect benefits from increased health to society. Find me a person who will argue healthier, happier workers are not more productive. More productivity = more profit. That's something I would totally get behind.

I do not believe prices will be driven up from increased government involvement. In fact, a [decently run] government program would necessarily lower individual costs by allowing prices to be dictated by the collective bargaining power of the consumer. Costs can be brought down to a realistic valuation for providing the service while fairly compensating workers who provide that service with some room for profit left in order to incentivize their troubles. Will the man who owns the hospital but has never set foot in it make less money? Definitely. But you what? You don't need to defend him, he'll be alright.. Extracting maximum profit from a system which oppresses the poor is morally unacceptable (to me).

Honestly, I think a purely capitalist healthcare and insurance industry might be cheaper than what we have right now. Nothing you say makes me think this is untrue. But it would not be the best possible system. Healthcare is not like other industries. People don't shop around when they're unconscious and dying. If you give someone the option of paying $5,000 more for an inferior service or going to a competitor and possibly dying, guess which one they will choose. Healthcare is not a consumer market. Prices are not set according to supply and demand like in other industries. They're set by the suppliers at whatever rate produces maximum profit. In other industries, this is acceptable and desirable. In matters related to saving lives, it's evil. It is, quite literally, profiting from the suffering of others by denying them access.

Our government-capitalist hybrid we have brings out the worst of both without adding any benefit. I think if someone was trying to create the worst system possible, they would create the system we have. You have a profit-motive system where the government is footing the bill. Obviously this is going to create problems. A move in either direction will help. I favor the government side. Other countries have been successful with their healthcare systems. I have yet to hear any cogent reason it couldn't work here.

4/9/2012 4:56:15 PM

Damn Credible to me!

4/9/2012 8:14:09 PM

Quote :

"Medical costs are inflated because private insurance doesn't pay out the total claim amount so hospitals have to inflate prices to cover costs. You argue that this is the government's doing. I argue that it's the insurance companies ripping off their customers by not providing a service that has been paid for so that they can increase profits 12% over the same quarter last year. You cannot deny that money is extracted from the healthcare industry through profit. "

You are right about providers inflating costs to offset future cuts but you dont think Medicare does this? Hell its the damn pace car. lol

And then you seem to fall for the whole "for profit" devil arguement, but probably dont realize most of the major PRIVATE insurance companies are nonprofit. Like NC Bluecross/bluesheild.

Quote :

"I do not believe prices will be driven up from increased government involvement. In fact, a [decently run] government program would necessarily lower individual costs by allowing prices to be dictated by the collective bargaining power of the consumer. Costs can be brought down to a realistic valuation for providing the service while fairly compensating workers who provide that service with some room for profit left in order to incentivize their troubles. Will the man who owns the hospital but has never set foot in it make less money? Definitely. But you what? You don't need to defend him, he'll be alright.. Extracting maximum profit from a system which oppresses the poor is morally unacceptable (to me). "

wow, you really are ignorant on our healthcare and political system. But you used the word oppress so you have to be taken seriously. haha. The poor have the best insurance for the money, period. It is teh working poor who need help, simply more subsidies will only continue to increase real costs. Shit just look at education costs...but YOU dont think more govt involvement will increase costs... holy shit.

Quote :

"Our government-capitalist hybrid we have brings out the worst of both without adding any benefit. "

haha, I always wonder why politicians use meaningless talking points...but damn if they dont work on some people.

4/9/2012 10:21:16 PM

Quote :

"You are right about providers inflating costs to offset future cuts but you dont think Medicare does this? Hell its the damn pace car. lol And then you seem to fall for the whole "for profit" devil arguement, but probably dont realize most of the major PRIVATE insurance companies are nonprofit. Like NC Bluecross/bluesheild."

Bullshit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Cross_Blue_Shield_Association#North_Carolina

Quote :

"In the past Blue Cross Blue Shield has been sued and fined for denying due medical treatments to its customers and for underpaying doctors.[13] BCBSNC has also come under fire for a failed attempt to convert to for-profit status in 2003, a year in which it posted a record profit of $196 million and most customers saw their rates rise by more than 10%."

That's one year of profit from almost 10 years ago in only North Carolina. $196 million would buy a lot of healthcare for a lot of people in one year.

Everything else you said was your worthless, stupid opinion.

4/10/2012 12:11:32 AM

suh-nap

4/10/2012 8:48:21 AM

haha, so what I said about NCBCBS being a nonprofit is bullshit, and then posted how they FAILED to become a for profit in 2003?

The CEO gets paid in the millions too.

I was just showing you how well your nonprofit fairy works. Puts to rest the "if we just made them all nonprofit..." bs

4/10/2012 9:24:33 AM

i sure do love all this civil, reasoned discourse now that pack_bryan is gone

4/10/2012 9:56:01 AM

[Edited on April 10, 2012 at 10:14 AM. Reason : ib4 war apologists and Democratic party loyalists]

4/10/2012 10:11:46 AM

Quote :

"haha, so what I said about NCBCBS being a nonprofit is bullshit, and then posted how they FAILED to become a for profit in 2003? The CEO gets paid in the millions too. I was just showing you how well your nonprofit fairy works. Puts to rest the "if we just made them all nonprofit..." bs"

What??? You think a private insurance company that makes $198 million in one year in a mid-size state is non-profit? Where do you get your weed because I really want to know what could possibly make you that high? Nevermind, you're probably smoking crack.

So you think that if non-profit private insurance groups are extracting almost $200m a year in profit from a state with 7 million people that it would be a good idea to go ahead and make them for-profit so they can go ahead and make more money? This is your plan for lowering costs to customers? Do you expect people to take you seriously? Because it seems like you're trolling because there's no way someone could actually be that irrational and counter-intuitive.

And why the hell did you put that last part in quotes? Who fucking said that? I never said it. It's never been brought up in this thread anywhere. Where did it come from? Who said it? I've been advocating for more government control. That's not nonprofit so I have no idea where you got this from? Stop changing the conversation when I call you out for being a dumbass. You are the most misinformed idiot on this board after Geniusboy.

Quote :

"i sure do love all this civil, reasoned discourse now that pack_bryan is gone"

I'm working within the framework that has been set forth. If the policy on what's acceptable changes, let me know.

4/10/2012 10:50:58 AM

You do realize that non-profit just means they spend 100% of their revenue, right? Here's an example:

Company A has 100 employees. Nets 10 million USD a year, pays each employee 100k.

Company B has 100 employees. Nets 10 million USD a year, pays each employee 90k, puts 100k towards capital, or just banks it.

Company A is classified as a "non-profit". Company B is "for profit".

This is why I weep for humanity every time one of you assholes clamor for more non-profits. Even if it's a non-profit, people still need to make money to work. People aren't going to provide services for free.

4/10/2012 11:31:34 AM