New, Improved Obamacare Program Released On 35 Floppy Disks
- Thread starter Michael
- Start date
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
What are you trying to say here?
From the article,
You prefer no consumer protections? Lets do away with the FDA while we are at it? Is that what you are advocating?
Yes, let's do away with the FDA. Before you potentially lose the plot, NO, this does not mean we'll do away with 'regulation' - it's means we'll use private voluntary organizations to provide the same services.
I know it's difficult to imagine us little peon's can manage to organize ourselves to regulate medical devices, drugs and procedures all by our little selves - but, given our PRIVATE Universities (example: Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Yale, etc...) are the ones' training our "Federal Civil Servants"/Political Masters - I'm sure we could manage.
But, we won't. Instead we'll grow the role of the Federal Government and we'll have a larger bureaucracy, lower quality and more expensive disease-care at the loss of prosperity to the USA per usual. Why? Because Americans have come to see the role of the Federal Government/The State as an inefficient mechanism to 'redistribute' wealth to themselves - instead of upholding the Law. Unless you've worked in a large State bureaucracy, you'd never imagine how the stated goal of the organization is as faaaaaaaaar from the priority of the bureaucrats who infests such institutions. Which is why it's no surprise to me that some public schools graduate students at a 47% functional literacy rate. In the land of the State Education, "education" takes a backseat to personal ambition, promotion and power. AND why not? With a near-monopoly, who'd give a crap about some other kids' literacy? Anyone who would care - would leave and go work in the private sector. The same is true in medicine (only much worse and multiple the nepotism by the increase in money and power).
Who pays them?
Who pays who?
1. Health Service Companies (drugs/devices/etc...) have HUGE incentives to provide safe high quality products (a) they don't want to destroy their reputation - HUGE incentive there (b) do not want to be sued for fraud (selling a product that doesn't do what it says it does - or worse, harms someone) and in a free-market the CEO and/or owners would be held accountable (c) competition drives innovation and high quality.
2. If customers only purchase healthcare products that are certified by 'Stanford Healthcare Group' - then industry will volunteer to seek this certification. At the same time Stanford will not want to impugn their own reputation - meaning that have a high incentive to ensure they really are providing a high quality certification.
3. Insurance companies are not going to pay for products that are not certified as that would be a waste of money. Not only that, they are going to have a hard time selling policies to people UNLESS they ensure the products that they pay for are of high quality.
4. In a free-market competition ensures cheap high quality insurance - which helps to drive cheap high quality healthcare... maybe even true healthcare (as opposed to disease care).
We really can't know what other products MAY arise. But, we know this much - highly regulated medicine has over the last 80 years turned cheap high quality healthcare into overly expensive low quality disease care.
SEE:
How Government Solved the Health Care Crisis
Medical Insurance that Worked � Until Government "Fixed" It
Last edited:
spidergoat
Oh, someone will volunteer.
We used to have snake oil salesmen peddling bottles of who knows what as cures for every ailment on Earth. Of course we weren't guaranteed to survive a dose, nor was there any way to know if it worked. In fact, most of it didn't and some contained lead, turpentine, coal tar, methanol and snake venom. And there were no safe, effective drugs, no studies of mortality, no double blind studies, nothing. Why? Because no one would pay to have them done. The purveyors didn't want their product examined, the individual purchaser had no resources and it takes a government to pool enough resources. Same goes for food inspectors. The producers have no motive to pay for it and the consumer certainly doesn't have the resources and protection of the citizen from food borne diseases and quack medicines is a legitimate function of government. This is what Anarchy gets you with no FDA, that's why we have one.
Grumpy
Oh, someone will volunteer.
We used to have snake oil salesmen peddling bottles of who knows what as cures for every ailment on Earth. Of course we weren't guaranteed to survive a dose, nor was there any way to know if it worked. In fact, most of it didn't and some contained lead, turpentine, coal tar, methanol and snake venom. And there were no safe, effective drugs, no studies of mortality, no double blind studies, nothing. Why? Because no one would pay to have them done. The purveyors didn't want their product examined, the individual purchaser had no resources and it takes a government to pool enough resources. Same goes for food inspectors. The producers have no motive to pay for it and the consumer certainly doesn't have the resources and protection of the citizen from food borne diseases and quack medicines is a legitimate function of government. This is what Anarchy gets you with no FDA, that's why we have one.
Grumpy
Are you serious? Your argument for sticking it to the American Public with half-arsed overly expensive Public Disease-Care is because one time, you knew of someone, who once was too stupid to know better and bought some magic-beans, once... long long ago... at a market square.... sometime in the Middle Ages.
Give me a break.
ObamaCare is not going to fix the healthcare system - it IS going to make it worse. This is an inevitability. To 'fix' healthcare we need to OVERHAUL the medical system and replace it with free-markets. True free markets. Which is never going to happen so long as people expect their Government to provide them with medical care instead of doing what it was designed to do - uphold the Law.
Physicians working in Obamacare in 30 years will look like the crime-riddled gangland crack-whore breeders found in Public Housing of today. I only hope you're around to experience it.
Anyway,
(1) No amount of regulation is going to prevent someone too stupid from buying magic beans at the market (see: "Alternative" medicine, Rekei, Astrology, Jehovah's Witness, etc...). But, get this, people are free to be stupid (see: Mirror).
(2) In the modern world, no one can sell 'snake oil' and say it's been tested and proven to cure X, Y and Z. This is called FRAUD. Fraud is illegal and it's a simple matter of taking the fraudster to court and allowing a Jury of Peers determine retribution.
But hey, the Talking Box in the livingroom told you the next thing you must care about is healthcare. Next it'll be government shutdown. After that it'll be the new tax on your home. So, best not to let common sense get in the way of cognitive bias and watch the magic-talking-box in the livingroom.
NOTE:
Medical Error Is The Fifth-Leading Cause Of Death In The U.S.
Medical errors are the fifth-leading cause of deaths in the US, with up to 98,000 deaths annually.
I think it is more than a little hypocritical of Republicans to make such a fuss over one misstatement by Obama that affects a small sliver of the population given the large volume of lies almost all Republican officials, financiers, activists and entertainers have and continue to promulgate with respect to healthcare and Obamacare in particular.
And Republican faux outrage over the Obamacare website failures is even more hypocritical given Republicans have been and continue to try to sabotage the law at every opportunity. Now we have Republicans like the Koch brothers financing ads to convince people not to sign up…to violate the law and be fiscally irresponsible. Republican immorality and hypocrisy is way beyond the pale. It’s disgusting and should be abhorrent to any individual with a modicum of decency.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckra...ive-group-helping-muck-up-obamacare-in-alaska
And Republican faux outrage over the Obamacare website failures is even more hypocritical given Republicans have been and continue to try to sabotage the law at every opportunity. Now we have Republicans like the Koch brothers financing ads to convince people not to sign up…to violate the law and be fiscally irresponsible. Republican immorality and hypocrisy is way beyond the pale. It’s disgusting and should be abhorrent to any individual with a modicum of decency.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckra...ive-group-helping-muck-up-obamacare-in-alaska
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Yes, before we had the scientific method of peer review and standardization. The good old days before the FDA.
From civilization?
And who is going to OVERHAUL the system and rewrite and enforce the Law? Oh I forgot, we need to OVERHAUL Tort reform also, so that we cannot sue for malpractice or misrepresentation.
Yes, just like all those other countries who have universal healthcare. Countries like Canada, and those medieval Brits and French.
You mean the "free market" system?
wiki, Fraud,
Bolded by me.
Sounds like the only talking box you watch is Fox.
Yes, those government doctors just have no clue, in spite of our excellent educational system.
btw. the concepts of Healthcare and Profit are mutually exclusive concepts. This why the only possible way for Universal healthcare is a single payer system and strict price controls.
And while the "uninformed" are screaming about cancellations and the end of Capitalism, you may want to consider this little tidbit,
Who was defrauding who?
Joe, I know this is going to come to a shock to you, but your constant Right - Left dichotomy is tiresome. IF you have an logical argument then make it. I almost think we should make a brand new logical fallacy just for you: Appeal to the GOP. How does that sound? Each time you mention Republican without making an argument and providing any evidence we'll just post "Appeal to the GOP" and you'll then know you're doing it again.
As for the Authoritarian Party - it has two wings, the so-called "Right" and the so-called "Left". But make no mistake, it's a single Authoritarian Party. BOTH sides want to use the State apparatus to control the public. The Left to build wondrous Public Schooling, Public Roads, Public Hospitals, Public Spying Agencies, Public Public Public. I mean, the average person can't wipe their own arse so of course the State Nanny will have to do it for them. The Right wants to the State to push it's sociopathic Religious bullshit down everyone's throat. Both love killing women and children - so long as they're Muslims. You know O-blah-blah and his signature double tap where the children run out to cry over their father's body and O-blah-blah sends a "Hell Fire" missile to murder them too. I hear "He's good at killing people". Oh, but he cares about your healthcare access ....
Oh by the Gods. Do you know what profit IS in the free-market? It's a signal that people WANT more of that service. Profit suggests that the person making the profit is doing something right.
Of course, we don't live in a free-market. We live in a crony capitalistic Authoritarian State where we little people aren't allowed to wipe our arses without permission from our Political "Leaders". Thus, profit in our system is typically a sign of rent-seeking. Which is most of modern heathcare.
As for the 'educational' system. I personally train medical doctors. That's my profession. Before they get to cut you open, I get to show them where some of the areas are they should try not to cut. You think public hospitals are wonderful? Well, I do hope you're around in 30 years to experience them. Public hospitals are the training grounds for surgeons on their way our of Public "Service" and into Private Practice.
But don't worry, I'm sure you know much more than I do.
Oh, explain to me how Healthcare and Profits are 'mutually exclusive'. Saying something isn't the same as making a logical argument. How about food? Is food and profits 'mutually exclusive'? How about education? Is education and profits 'mutually exclusive'? How about medical devices? How about drugs? How about housing?
Oh, one more question since we're on the topic of 'mutually exclusive' services. Do you think it should be legal for Private Citizens to pay for and seek Private Practitioners? I mean, suppose there are Public Hospitals. So, this gives the Private Citizen the free-choice between Private or Public medical care. Or do you think you have the right to take this freedom away from free-people? I'm just curious - given Private Practice is so much better than Public Service in any Public/Private healthcare system I've visited - and I've visited a few.
This should good.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
False premise, nobody wants healthcare services, but everybody will NEED them at some point in their lives. No one is exempt (by the gods). It is a universal phenomena and unless you advocate Darwinian survival by natural selection, it is a internationally recognized universal human right.
Verbal garbage.
As to the rent-seeking comment, this has now become part of the for-profit prison system, where the prison makes a profit by keeping people incarcerated as long as possible, which you still pay for with your taxes.
What is a "public hospital"? And where do "surgeons" practice their "private" surgeries, requiring multi-million dollar facilities? Their garage?
And if you are a "trainer" of medical doctors, then you must be working in a "public hospital" and be partly culpable for all those horrible experiences you are warning me about and I have personally experienced because of inadequate communication between "private doctors" handling my case.
Well, I worked for 20 years in hospital administration and medical billing and my wife worked all her life in the medical field as a hands-on nurse and ward-clerk. I believe that I am qualified to participate in this discussion.
But from your arguments I dare say that you are wholly unqualified to speak on this particular issue.
As a humanist I am inclined to say yes to all those examples. But it depends on your definitions of profit and fair pay. Please note that in spite of your lamentations, the stock market (where 80% of the wealth of the nation is owned by 10% of the population), reached historic heights just today, while the food-stamp program was cut for the poor "working people".
This is one of the largest employers in the nation and made record PROFITS this year. Many of their employees need food stamp assistance. For shame!!!!!!
If you have enough money no one is going to make you do anything except pay your fair share of taxes toward the "common good" of basic health care services for all. If you want medical care over and above the minimum you are entitled to, I'm sure you will find plenty of doctors who will indulge all your physical desires.
Not good enough for you?
Last edited:
The problem with the free market taking on healthcare is that the best care goes to those most able to afford it.
The rest are left with the inexperienced, and those who couldn't make it.
The ideal, surely, is to have very good healthcare for the whole population.
The best surgeons should be taking on the most difficult cases, not the richest patients.
The rest are left with the inexperienced, and those who couldn't make it.
The ideal, surely, is to have very good healthcare for the whole population.
The best surgeons should be taking on the most difficult cases, not the richest patients.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
I agree 100%
Michael
The 1800s were the middle ages? And the FDA isn't "sticking it to the public", they stick it to the hucksters and frauds selling the snake oil. Just their food inspection function justifies their existence and safe drugs that actually work are a good thing. As I have pointed out, if the FDA didn't exist we would have to invent it.
The only thing that will fix the healthcare system is single payer(like England has had since 1948). But Obamacare has already ended the practice of cancelling policies if you get sick, limiting yearly and lifetime coverage, failure to cover pre-existing conditions, charging outrageous fees for routine doctor visits, obscene profits, etc. In addition millions are now covered for the first time(no more using Emergency Room care as the primary doctor, leaving us with the huge bills). The junk policies the Insurance companies put out are what you get in a completely free market, no thanks. I much prefer the standards that insurance must meet as written in the ACA. Free market is what caused the expensive, inadequate mess that healthcare was before the ACA.
Of course, feel free. But it will be above and beyond any BASIC healthcare needs, those should be a Socialist system payed for by our mutual contributions, from each according to income and to each according to need.
The regulations are not there to control the actions of an idiot, they are there to keep the dishonest from taking unfair advantage of their idiocy. It's hard to make an informed choice about any drug if you have no clue if it is safe or effective(short of bodies lying on the ground around the snakeoil salesman, I guess).
In the modern world the individual consumer has no chance in a court of law when injured by a huge corporation, the courts are corrupted as bad as the political system by cubic money. You see ads for fraudulent products every day on your Fox channel, did you buy any gold from Gold Line? You got screwed. They sold millions for YEARS before regulators caught up to them. Remember Extense? Fraud. Hydro-cut, fraud. The manufacturers and gold hucksters know that eventually get shut down, they know they will make a bunch of money on their fraud before the government gets them shut down and the consumer is not informed they are a fraud UNTIL the government steps in. Sans government the free market is full of fraud. That's Anarchy, that's Free Market Capitalism. Robber Barrons were a result of their ability to act like Anarchists, it always goes bad for everyone but the rich, you know.
You should stick with things you know something about, you know nothing about the economy or any workable political/financial systems. Anarchy as a viable philosophy lasts only as long as you are completely alone, it cannot survive contact with it's opposite, civilization. Free Market is a license to steal sold to the highest bidder, greed always corrupts the system(but we need some of it), socialism always damps the system(but we need some of that, too). Anarchy is not even in the mix, it never works anywhere.
Grumpy
The 1800s were the middle ages? And the FDA isn't "sticking it to the public", they stick it to the hucksters and frauds selling the snake oil. Just their food inspection function justifies their existence and safe drugs that actually work are a good thing. As I have pointed out, if the FDA didn't exist we would have to invent it.
The only thing that will fix the healthcare system is single payer(like England has had since 1948). But Obamacare has already ended the practice of cancelling policies if you get sick, limiting yearly and lifetime coverage, failure to cover pre-existing conditions, charging outrageous fees for routine doctor visits, obscene profits, etc. In addition millions are now covered for the first time(no more using Emergency Room care as the primary doctor, leaving us with the huge bills). The junk policies the Insurance companies put out are what you get in a completely free market, no thanks. I much prefer the standards that insurance must meet as written in the ACA. Free market is what caused the expensive, inadequate mess that healthcare was before the ACA.
Of course, feel free. But it will be above and beyond any BASIC healthcare needs, those should be a Socialist system payed for by our mutual contributions, from each according to income and to each according to need.
The regulations are not there to control the actions of an idiot, they are there to keep the dishonest from taking unfair advantage of their idiocy. It's hard to make an informed choice about any drug if you have no clue if it is safe or effective(short of bodies lying on the ground around the snakeoil salesman, I guess).
In the modern world the individual consumer has no chance in a court of law when injured by a huge corporation, the courts are corrupted as bad as the political system by cubic money. You see ads for fraudulent products every day on your Fox channel, did you buy any gold from Gold Line? You got screwed. They sold millions for YEARS before regulators caught up to them. Remember Extense? Fraud. Hydro-cut, fraud. The manufacturers and gold hucksters know that eventually get shut down, they know they will make a bunch of money on their fraud before the government gets them shut down and the consumer is not informed they are a fraud UNTIL the government steps in. Sans government the free market is full of fraud. That's Anarchy, that's Free Market Capitalism. Robber Barrons were a result of their ability to act like Anarchists, it always goes bad for everyone but the rich, you know.
You should stick with things you know something about, you know nothing about the economy or any workable political/financial systems. Anarchy as a viable philosophy lasts only as long as you are completely alone, it cannot survive contact with it's opposite, civilization. Free Market is a license to steal sold to the highest bidder, greed always corrupts the system(but we need some of it), socialism always damps the system(but we need some of that, too). Anarchy is not even in the mix, it never works anywhere.
Grumpy
Re Anarchy.
Insofar as it means letting people do what they want if it's not affecting others, a bit of anarchy is good too.
Regarding the free market, I wonder why it has worked so well in some areas and not others.
Food is also a necessary commodity, but I wouldn't want a government controlling food distribution and sale.
The supermarkets actually compete, and consequently do a good job.
Captain Kremmen
True, but you don't want Anarchy in charge of anything. Personal freedom is not Anarchy. Your freedom to swing your fists about ends when they contact my nose, a perfect analogy of why Anarchy cannot survive contact with civilization.
You think the food industry is free market? The Farm Bill is one of the biggest welfare programs not only because of food stamps, but farmers are on a whole host of subsidies and incentives. Michelle Bachman gets over 380,000 bucks per year for her farm, yet she calls the President a Socialist. Even the commodity markets are more of a feedback loop to stabilize prices than a free market. We even pay farmers to grow more of some things and less of others. We insure their crops so one bad year doesn't lead to bankruptcy. But like the motor in your car, it will run much better with feedback and controls than it will with a trained squirrel pouring gas out of a bottle into the intake according to his anarchist whim(that is if thoughts of acorns don't enter his anarchist head). That the grocery stores then take those socialist controlled produced goods and make a profit packaging, modifying, transporting them and selling them is only possible because of that socialist base of farm controls, inspection, roads to transport them on, the police force that keeps hungry peons from ripping them off and a military that makes sure the next country over doesn't do the same. The only truly free market in the US today is the illegal drug trade, and it leads to this...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/29/cartel-vigilantes-mexico_n_4174821.html
Legalize and regulate them and you get something more like this...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...t_n_4209874.html?utm_hp_ref=medical-marijuana
Grumpy
True, but you don't want Anarchy in charge of anything. Personal freedom is not Anarchy. Your freedom to swing your fists about ends when they contact my nose, a perfect analogy of why Anarchy cannot survive contact with civilization.
You think the food industry is free market? The Farm Bill is one of the biggest welfare programs not only because of food stamps, but farmers are on a whole host of subsidies and incentives. Michelle Bachman gets over 380,000 bucks per year for her farm, yet she calls the President a Socialist. Even the commodity markets are more of a feedback loop to stabilize prices than a free market. We even pay farmers to grow more of some things and less of others. We insure their crops so one bad year doesn't lead to bankruptcy. But like the motor in your car, it will run much better with feedback and controls than it will with a trained squirrel pouring gas out of a bottle into the intake according to his anarchist whim(that is if thoughts of acorns don't enter his anarchist head). That the grocery stores then take those socialist controlled produced goods and make a profit packaging, modifying, transporting them and selling them is only possible because of that socialist base of farm controls, inspection, roads to transport them on, the police force that keeps hungry peons from ripping them off and a military that makes sure the next country over doesn't do the same. The only truly free market in the US today is the illegal drug trade, and it leads to this...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/29/cartel-vigilantes-mexico_n_4174821.html
Legalize and regulate them and you get something more like this...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...t_n_4209874.html?utm_hp_ref=medical-marijuana
Grumpy
For an individual with an objective reasonable mind, the answer is not that difficult to find. Money is power. And as Lord Acton said, “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” That is why constraints are necessary. I suggest you do some reading on the antitrust movement which developed during the era of laissez-faire.
“Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
Lord Acton
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dalberg-Acton,_1st_Baron_Acton
Conservatives, especially the conservative foot soldiers don’t understand that a free market is not necessarily an efficient market. And conservative economic policy is all based on the notion that free markets are necessarily efficient. In the case of healthcare, healthcare buyers cannot make rational decisions because they lack information and are generally ill and in crisis. Buying healthcare is not like buying a car or a home or food. Given the nature of healthcare, it is impossible for rational efficient markets to work unless you have a single payer system like those used the rest of the developed world.
Well I think you do want government controlling the distribution and sale of food. Because that is exactly what happens today, food production and distribution is very highly regulated. We have a cabinet level agency, the Department of Agriculture which oversees federal food production and distribution. You have another cabinet level agency, Health and Human services (i.e. Federal Food and Drug Administration) that also oversees food safety, not to mention every state, county and some cities have food production and distribution laws and enforcement agencies. You just don’t see or are aware of most of it as it is so uncontroversial. And that is also why the passage of the farm bill is so important. Our government sets standards, and conducts inspections to ensure that are food meets some minimum safety and labeling standards and production requirements to ensure the fiscal viability of the various industries. All developed nations do the same.
Supermarkets do compete, but they also must comply with food regulatory requirements.
Last edited:
Was it ever proposed that states could opt in or out of the new system?
I can see some advantages.
It would have been helpful to have the state government positive towards the system.
Plus, perhaps it need not have been so complex.
Why did it have to roll-out nationwide?
I can see some advantages.
It would have been helpful to have the state government positive towards the system.
Plus, perhaps it need not have been so complex.
Why did it have to roll-out nationwide?
Yes, the can and that is at the root of our current problems. States that have adopted Obamacare are doing well. States that have opted out of state exchanges and Medicaid expansions (i.e. Republican controlled states) is the cause of our current Obamacare woes.
It would have been helpful if Republicans had not decided to be knuckle draggers and instead of trying to sabotage the law for political gain or do anything that might benefit the nation for fear people might look upon the Obama administration as successful. But that is not the Republican Party we have. The days of a patriotic Republican Party are long gone.