New, Improved Obamacare Program Released On 35 Floppy Disks

Tach

The caregivers charge X, the insurance reduces the charge to 0.6X and you still refuse to see the fact that the insurance negotiated down the caregivers.

That's like discussing the arrangement of the deck chairs on the Titanic. The fact remains we spend more than twice as much for the whole health care process for care than is not available to millions of American citizens, that could be cancelled if you got sick, did not cover pre-existing conditions, that had yearly and lifetime caps, that required every bit of your health history and then used that history to NOT cover what you bought insurance for and was priced beyond where many families could afford. All while the insurance companies payed outlandish executive salaries and made obscene profits. We've tried Free Market insurance, if Obamacare is sabotaged successfully by the Republicans, then Single Payer gets here, immediately. And the Republican party is dead by political suicide(well, the angry mobs and pitchforks aside).

Here's why...

BV-KUteCcAEnEOe.jpg


Grumpy:cool:
 
Tach



That's like discussing the arrangement of the deck chairs on the Titanic. The fact remains we spend more than twice as much for the whole health care process for care than is not available to millions of American citizens, that could be cancelled if you got sick, did not cover pre-existing conditions, that had yearly and lifetime caps, that required every bit of your health history and then used that history to NOT cover what you bought insurance for and was priced beyond where many families could afford. All while the insurance companies payed outlandish executive salaries and made obscene profits. We've tried Free Market insurance, if Obamacare is sabotaged successfully by the Republicans, then Single Payer gets here, immediately. And the Republican party is dead by political suicide(well, the angry mobs and pitchforks aside).

Here's why...

BV-KUteCcAEnEOe.jpg


Grumpy:cool:

For the last 13 years, the fiscal recklessness we have seen exhibited by this Republican Party is unprecedented in American history. In some ways they remind me of the Titanic going full steam ahead at night in the middle of iceberg filled seas. With respect to Obamacare, they remind me of kamikazes.
 
Here we can agree. Children start school at 7 instead of 4 (in England they want them to start at 2!). In Australia is not uncommon to put infants aged 6 WEEKS into daycare to get back to work.

Thanks to the Federal Reserve corrupting our money, our entire society is perverted from what is normal and healthy - healthcare is just one example.

Everyone wants cheap high quality healthcare - the ONLY means for multicultural USA to reach that goal is a free-market. Again, I'm sure no one could imagine the hell-holes public housing has turned out to be IN THE USA. No one could have imagined Public Schools would graduate children with a 47% functional ILLITERACY rate. But this is what happened.

I'm sure you can't imagine day when Public Hospitals are so crap you'd rather take your chances on your own than entering one - but, this is what will happen in the USA if we have Universal Healthcare. I can promise you this much.

So that explains why those public hospitals are so loved by people who have them...people like Stephen Hawkins (United Kingdom)? Additionally, we have had public hospitals in the US for....gee...for at least a century. And many of them are exceptional trauma centers, Highland Hospital in Oakland, California being one example. If I were injured, that is the place I would want to be.

And yeah we know, you think the Federal Reserve is responsible for everything including the weather. But that doesn't make it so. It just means you have some rather unusual and unfounded beliefs. You would think if "free market" healthcare worked you could point to at least one example of it in a world of over 200 nation states and thousands of years of history. But you cannot. And that is or should be a problem for you.

Our friends and allies in other wealthy nations think Americans are crazy. They don't understand the controversy. Universal healthcare is a no brainer for them. They like their socialized fascist healthcare. :) Because it is cheaper and better than American healthcare.
 
Tell Them This Is Wrong

Meanwhile, Beyond the Politics ....

There is a strange realm beyond the Beltway, where political rhetoric gives way to something that is, apparently, far less value.

The situation on the ground, such as the phrase goes, involves more than ratings battles between cable news networks and perpetual-campaign electoral bickering. That is, beyond the Beltway there is something called reality.

On the campaign trail, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was still blasting the new health-care law as unsalvageable. At the White House, President Obama was still apologizing for the botched federal Web site.

But in a state where the rollout has gone smoothly, and in a county that is one of the poorest and unhealthiest in the country, Courtney Lively has been busy signing people up: cashiers from the IGA grocery, clerks from the dollar store, workers from the lock factory, call-center agents, laid-off coal miners, KFC cooks, Chinese green-card holders in town to teach Appalachian students.

Now it was the beginning of another day, and a man Lively would list as Client 375 sat across from her in her office at a health clinic next to a Hardee’s.

“So, is that Breathitt County?” she asked Woodrow Wilson Noble as she tapped his information into a laptop Thursday morning.

“Yeah, we live on this side of the hill,” said Noble, whose family farm had gone under, who lived on food stamps and what his mother could spare, and who was about to hear whether he would have health insurance for the first time in his 60-year-old life.

This is how things are going in Kentucky: As conservatives argued that the new health-care law will wreck the economy, as liberals argued it will save billions, as many Americans raged at losing old health plans and some analysts warned that a disproportionate influx of the sick and the poor could wreck the new health-care model, Lively was telling Noble something he did not expect to hear.

“All right,” she said. “We’ve got you eligible for Medicaid.”


(McCrummen)

It's actually a depressing read, even for those who support the PPACA. Stephanie McCrummen essentially chronicles the work of Courtney Lively as she signs up several rural Kentuckians for health insurance.

Lively, who has been signing people up since the exchanges opened in early October, said one woman cried when she was told she qualified for Medicaid under the new law. She said people have been “pouring in” to her office, an unused exam room in the back of the clinic, where her set-up includes a table, a two-drawer filing cabinet, manila folders, a planner to track her schedule, a notebook to track her numbers and a laptop that connects to the state health-insurance exchange, Kynect.

Clinic doctors often send patients without insurance her way after their visits, but most come by word of mouth. Lively has signed up fathers who then sent their sons, and mothers who sent aunts. She signed up one Subway sandwich shop worker, and soon what seemed like the whole staff showed up.

Although she once had to dispel a rumor that enrolling involved planting a microchip in your arm, and though she avoids calling the new law “Obamacare” in a red state, most people need little persuading.

It is easy enough to chuckle when Ronald Hudson hears what assistance he qualifies for and says, "Well, thank God. I believe I'm going to be a Democrat."

But to some degree it's hard to celebrate; there is certainly joy as Jeff Fletcher slaps the table and claps his hands "I'm covered? Woo-hoo! I can go to the doctor now? I'm serious. I need to go."

It is also heartbreaking. We might say whatever we want about the guy with five kids and a pretax income of fourteen thousand dollars, or the thirty-six year-old man with cirrhosis who had to be hauled down to Lively's office by his mother, or the mother of eleven trying to get that much healthcare for that many people. Say what you will of the drinkers and smokers and people who can't seem to stop making babies. But in the end, these are all human beings, and while Republicans take smug pleasure in the troubles plaguing the federal and several state health exchange websites, these people are the genuine stakes in a titanic political fight.

Say what you want about how these people ended up in whatever condition we find them.

And then look any one of them in the eye and tell them to hurry up and die, already. Tell Mr. Fletcher, who lives under the shadow of lung cancer, that each day when he wakes up and thinks about that spot on his lung that he hasn't followed up on for years because he can't afford it to be thankful for life, and then explain that he really ought not have the reassurance of knowing whether or not he is next in the family line of lung cancer casualties because it might make Mitch McConnell sad if this health reform thing works.

The per-capita income in Breathitt is about $15,000, and the rates of diabetes, hypertension and other health problems earned this part of Kentucky the nickname “Coronary Valley.”

When I think of how people accuse coastal, urban liberals of hating rural areas and the middle of the country, the rhetoric really does come into sharp focus. The four hundred ninety five square miles comprising Breathitt County, Kentucky sustain an estimated population of 13,635. Its history boasts fascinating trivia, such as the idea that Breathitt was the only county in the entire nation, during World War I, that filled its service quotas without a draft. Indeed, Kentuckians, including those from present-day "Coronary Valley", ranked among the most physically fit. Those days are long over; Breathitt County today is, as Courtney Lively describes it, "Just poor."

That they should have access to health insurance troubles their U.S. Senate delegation.

Three words: Quality of life.

They mean nothing to Beltway Republicans. They mean everything in the world to the person living that life.

It's a depressing read, to be certain. But it is also a vital reminder that this is about much more than just how smug our Republican neighbors get to feel about the human suffering they are working so hard to inflict, perpetuate, and augment.
____________________

Notes:

McCrummen, Stephanie. "In rural Kentucky, health-care debate takes back seat as the long-uninsured line up". The Washington Post. November 23, 2013. WashingtonPost.com. November 23, 2013. http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...9dc6e0-5465-11e3-9e2c-e1d01116fd98_story.html

See Also:

Wikipedia. "Breathitt County, Kentucky". November 7, 2013. En.Wikipedia.org. November 23, 2013. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breathitt_County,_Kentucky
 
Universal healthcare is a no brainer for them. They like their socialized fascist healthcare. :) Because it is cheaper and better than American healthcare.
The NHS is not "better" than American Fascist Healthcare - the outcomes are the same in terms of 'healthcare'.

However, yes, our Fascist healthcare system in the USA costs twice as much - but that's because of people like you Joe. You who want the government to 'regulate' all aspects of everyone's lives. You're not even content to allow those of us who do not want to have the State stick it's nose up our arses - no, for some reason you think because you like the nose up your arse, and because we were both born with the same stupid Citizenship Stamp at birthm, that I and others can't be free to make our own healthcare choices - choices that have no effect on and do not concern you. Nope, not good enough for the Joe's of the world. They want the State's nose up their arse and for some inexplicable reason aren't happy unless it's up everyone around them as well.

Why is that Joe? I could never understand why you feel you have a say in my peaceful negotiations. Ignoring your brainwashed Nation State citizenship - what moral argument do you make to justify you using the State to force other's peaceful interactions? I'm just curious how you square the circle without resorting to idiotic ideas of citizenship.

But, yes, thanks to the Joe's the World, and there's plenty of them - disease care costs twice as much with no appreciable gain in the USSA. To me the solution is simple, peaceful succession. I don't mind living in a Union where I'm not forced to pay a 'transaction' fee in the State's currency to the State to provide services that I'm more than happy to pay for directly. If I want to use a road - I'll pay for my use in gasoline tax or a toll. If I want to read a book, I'll buy the god damn book. Etc... See how simple that is Joe? More and more people like me are mushrooming up across the USA. People who want to peacefully leave you to yourselves.

Much like Mao's Great Leap Backwards, LBJ's not-so-Great Society is (40 years later) much LESS prosperous - and this trend will continue. Until one day, people won't want to BE American any longer. Let's hope it happens during our lifetimes. Won't that be nice Joe? Because the trend IS going to continue. You don't get to buy up houses in the slums of Detroit, be a Slum Lord and not leave your children a shit-hole of a society Joe. That's the price. The starting place is 1 in 12 people harmed IN hospital. That's right now. Not some time in the future. Now. By the looks of the ObamaCare Website - I expect that number to rise to 1 in 3 across the next 25 years. You know the fear you may experience if you accidentally drive into "The Public Housing" Projects? That will be the fear you experience when you realize the ambulance you awoke in - is driving you to the Public Hospital. Where the Public Schooled staff can barely read the forms needed to shuffle you away down some dank Public Hospital hallway to some smelly Public Hospital room paint pealing off the old moldy walls....AGAIN, no one could imagine 40 years from LBJ's "Great Society" demagoguery kids would be graduating from Public Schools not able to read and write. So, imagine how bad Public Housing IS, multiply that by 1000 and that will be your room at the Public Hospital you're forced into towards the end.

It is going to happen - of that I have no question.



As for the logic in your desire to have the State provide "Universal Healthcare".
Joe's argument: We need to initiate force against innocent people for the common good of the innocent people.
One more time to make sure you have it clear in your head: We need to initiate force against innocent people for the common good of the innocent people.

Sounding a little sociopathic? It should - because it is. We have to Rape the People, To Love the People.
IMO only a brainwashed theobot/statebot is trained (from childhood) to think like this.



I have a another off topic question, as I understand you believe in The Sky Daddy - right? Since this popped into my head I thought I'd ask. Once it's understood that the State is delineated from other groups of humans by it's legal obligation to initiate force against innocent people, and now knowing this is inherently immoral, do you think the God-Head will send you to Hell for supporting an anti-Christian organization of humans AKA the US Federal Government? Or do you suppose you can tell the God-Head that you were born into a time and place of Nation States and were just normalized to the violence around you - that your implicit support for a violent resolution over that of a peaceful voluntary one was probably just a product of watching to much MSNBC and you should be left off the hook. I wonder what the God-Head would do? What does the God-Head do to people who not only Sin, but knowingly support violence against the innocent as they continue to Sin over and over and over? Even going so far as to support the evil institution that is murdering women and children in the ME in double tap bombing raids. Sociopath In Cheif I'm-Good-at-Killing-People Obama. Yeah, he's the one you want organizing your 'HealthCARE'.

Enjoy your ObamaCare.
 
"Analysts are divided on the extent to which Obamacare has influenced the remarkable slowdown in health spending since the law was passed in 2010. Most agree that it is likely due to a combination of factors, including less health care consumption in the global financial crisis’ wake, savings from the ACA’s hospital payment reforms, increasing reliance on cheaper generic drugs, and ongoing changes in the medical industry as providers form more efficient and collaborative care models encouraged by Obamacare. It will take years before enough data is available to perform a more precise analysis of Obamacare’s effect on health spending.
Regardless, the record slowdown is one of the most important economic developments of the decade, and has huge ramifications for the fiscal viability of major programs like Medicare and Medicaid. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has already cut its projections for Medicare and Medicaid’s price tag in 2020 by $147 billion — a 10 percent reduction from previous estimates.
That’s significant because those health entitlements are the primary driver of U.S. debt. The CBO’s dire predictions about future debt are based on the assumption that health care costs will continue spiking for the foreseeable future. But now that costs are growing more modestly, the country’s long-term budgetary outlook is improving.
Meanwhile, while Healthcare.gov’s rollout has indeed been disastrous, the site is slowly improving."

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/11/22/2983481/media-historic-slowdown-health-spending/

Here is the report, these are not projections, they are actual expenditures...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/healthcostreport_final_noembargo_v2.pdf

Enjoy your Obamacare, indeed.

Grumpy:cool:
 
It's Not Officially Covered By the ADA, But ....

Grumpy said:

Enjoy your Obamacare, indeed.

Didn't you hear? If you think Obamacare is anything other than a website, you're akin to Baghdad Bob.

Or, in this case, to be specific, if you attend facts, you're a liar.

In order to be honest, you need to reject facts and accept lies.

I know, I know. But consider it like disability accommodation. We have to meet a bullshit quota, or else we're discriminating unfairly.
 
Didn't you hear? If you think Obamacare is anything other than a website, you're akin to Baghdad Bob.

Or, in this case, to be specific, if you attend facts, you're a liar.

In order to be honest, you need to reject facts and accept lies.

I know, I know. But consider it like disability accommodation. We have to meet a bullshit quota, or else we're discriminating unfairly.

Well done Tiassa! Unfortunately, that is the truth of the matter.
 
The NHS is not "better" than American Fascist Healthcare - the outcomes are the same in terms of 'healthcare'.

Oh, then where is the proof? You don’t have any. Just saying stuff does not make it so. The World Health Organization rate healthcare systems say otherwise. US healthcare is more than twice as expensive. It doesn’t provide universal coverage and the quality outcomes have fallen and continue to decline.

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


http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/us-healthcare-performance-score-declines


This is a damning chart for American healthcare.

Life_expectancy_vs_healthcare_spending.jpg


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States#Quality_assurance

Our wealthy socialists fascist fellows are doing healthcare better than we are in the US. And you cannot point to a libertarian healthcare model that has done better. For some reason they don't like dying and suffering. You cannot make a reasoned, evidenced backed case for libertarian healthcare. One would think that after centuries of laissez faire, if it worked, you could point to one success story. But you cannot. And that is a problem for Libertarians like you who want to evangelize your libertarian ideology.

However, yes, our Fascist healthcare system in the USA costs twice as much - but that's because of people like you Joe. You who want the government to 'regulate' all aspects of everyone's lives. You're not even content to allow those of us who do not want to have the State stick it's nose up our arses - no, for some reason you think because you like the nose up your arse, and because we were both born with the same stupid Citizenship Stamp at birthm, that I and others can't be free to make our own healthcare choices - choices that have no effect on and do not concern you. Nope, not good enough for the Joe's of the world. They want the State's nose up their arse and for some inexplicable reason aren't happy unless it's up everyone around them as well.

Why is that Joe? I could never understand why you feel you have a say in my peaceful negotiations. Ignoring your brainwashed Nation State citizenship - what moral argument do you make to justify you using the State to force other's peaceful interactions? I'm just curious how you square the circle without resorting to idiotic ideas of citizenship.
But, yes, thanks to the Joe's the World, and there's plenty of them - disease care costs twice as much with no appreciable gain in the USSA. To me the solution is simple, peaceful succession. I don't mind living in a Union where I'm not forced to pay a 'transaction' fee in the State's currency to the State to provide services that I'm more than happy to pay for directly. If I want to use a road - I'll pay for my use in gasoline tax or a toll. If I want to read a book, I'll buy the god damn book. Etc... See how simple that is Joe? More and more people like me are mushrooming up across the USA. People who want to peacefully leave you to yourselves.
Much like Mao's Great Leap Backwards, LBJ's not-so-Great Society is (40 years later) much LESS prosperous - and this trend will continue. Until one day, people won't want to BE American any longer. Let's hope it happens during our lifetimes. Won't that be nice Joe? Because the trend IS going to continue. You don't get to buy up houses in the slums of Detroit, be a Slum Lord and not leave your children a shit-hole of a society Joe. That's the price. The starting place is 1 in 12 people harmed IN hospital. That's right now. Not some time in the future. Now. By the looks of the ObamaCare Website - I expect that number to rise to 1 in 3 across the next 25 years.
As for the logic in your desire to have the State provide "Universal Healthcare".
Joe's argument: We need to initiate force against innocent people for the common good of the innocent people.
One more time to make sure you have it clear in your head: We need to initiate force against innocent people for the common good of the innocent people.
Sounding a little sociopathic? It should - because it is. We have to Rape the People, To Save the People.
IMO only a brainwashed theobot/statebot is trained (from childhood) to think like this.
I have a another off topic question, as I understand you believe in The Sky Daddy - right? Since this popped into my head I thought I'd ask. Once it's understood that the State is delineated from other groups of humans by it's legal obligation to initiate force against innocent people, and now knowing this is inherently immoral, do you think the God-Head will send you to Hell for supporting an anti-Christian organization of humans AKA the US Federal Government? Or do you suppose you can tell the God-Head that you were born into a time and place of Nation States and were just normalized to the violence around you - that your implicit support for a violent resolution over that of a peaceful voluntary one was probably just a product of watching to much MSNBC and you should be left off the hook. I wonder what the God-Head would do? What does the God-Head do to people who not only Sin, but knowingly support violence against the innocent as they continue to Sin over and over and over? Even going so far as to support the evil institution that is murdering women and children in the ME in double tap bombing raids. Sociopath In Cheif I'm-Good-at-Killing-People Obama. Yeah, he's the one you want organizing your 'HealthCARE'. .

Oh hogwash, that is nothing but demagogic bull shit. As I have repeatedly told you, people who live in countries which provide universal healthcare, like famed physicist Stephen Hawkins, love their “socialist fascist” universal healthcare systems. And you cannot point to one instance in which the healthcare system you advocate has ever been successful. That is a problem for you and your fellow libertarians.
 
Last edited:
Oh, then where is the proof? You don�t have any. Just saying stuff does not make it so. The World Health Organization rate healthcare systems say otherwise. US healthcare is more than twice as expensive. It doesn�t provide universal coverage and the quality outcomes have fallen and continue to decline.

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

http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/us-healthcare-performance-score-declines

This is a damning chart for American healthcare.

Life_expectancy_vs_healthcare_spending.jpg


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States#Quality_assurance

Our wealthy socialists fascist fellows are doing healthcare better than we are in the US. And you cannot point to a libertarian healthcare model that has done better. For some reason they don't like dying and suffering. You cannot make a reasoned, evidenced backed case for libertarian healthcare. One would think that after centuries of laissez faire, if it worked, you could point to one success story. But you cannot. And that is a problem for Libertarians like you who want to evangelize your libertarian ideology.
Posted by Michael, (bunch of hogwash) .........................
Oh hogwash, that is nothing but demagogic bull shit. As I have repeatedly told you, people who live in countries which provide universal healthcare, like famed physicist Stephen Hawkins, love their �socialist fascist� universal healthcare systems. And you cannot point to one instance in which the healthcare system you advocate has ever been successful. That is a problem for you and your fellow libertarians.

I wonder if Libertarians know what that word actually means.
wiki,
Libertarianism (Latin: liber, "free")[1] is a set of related political philosophies that uphold liberty as the highest political end.[2][3] This includes emphasis on the primacy of individual liberty,[4][5] political freedom, and voluntary association. It is the antonym to authoritarianism.[6]

So clear, so simple. How could anyone argue with these fundamental concepts???

Well, lets have a quick look shall we,
Different schools of libertarianism disagree over whether the state should exist and, if so, to what extent.[7] While minarchists propose a state limited in scope to preventing aggression, theft, breach of contract and fraud, anarchists advocate its complete elimination as a political system.[7][8][9][10][11][12][13]

While certain libertarian currents are supportive of laissez-faire capitalism and private property rights, such as in land and natural resources, others reject capitalism and private ownership of the means of production, instead advocating their common or cooperative ownership and management[14][15][16][17] (see libertarian socialism).

In the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, libertarianism is defined as the moral view that agents initially fully own themselves and have certain moral powers to acquire property rights in external things.[18] Libertarian philosopher Roderick Long defines libertarianism as "any political position that advocates a radical redistribution of power from the coercive state to voluntary associations of free individuals", whether "voluntary association" takes the form of the free market or of communal co-operatives.[19]

What happens if you do not participate in communal co-operatives?

The U.S. Libertarian Party promotes individual sovereignty and seeks an end to coercion, advocating a government that is limited to protecting individuals from the initiation of force.[20]

Something like :
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The Four Freedoms were goals articulated by United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt on January 6, 1941. In an address known as the Four Freedoms speech (technically the 1941 State of the Union address), he proposed four fundamental freedoms that people "everywhere in the world" ought to enjoy:

1.Freedom of speech
2.Freedom of worship
3.Freedom from want
4.Freedom from fear
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Freedoms

The most significant inspiration for the inclusion of the right to an adequate standard of living in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was the 1941 Four Freedoms speech by US President Franklin Roosevelt, which declared freedom of speech, freedom of faith, freedom from want and freedom from fear.[2] On the basis of the speech the American Law Institute established a draft proposals for an international bill of rights, the Statement of Essential Human Rights, which greatly influenced the UDHR.[3] The statement included the right to adequate food and housing and the right to social security, including the right to health.[4] Article 25 of the UDHR recognises the right to an adequate standard of living, stating that:

"(1)Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All Children, whether born in or out of wedlock shall enjoy the same social protection."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_from_want

I just wonder how Libertarians visualize who will protect all those precious freedoms they are so fond of quoting.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if Libertarians know what that word actually means.
wiki,


Something like :

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


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

I just wonder how Libertarians visualize who will protect all those precious freedoms they are so fond of quoting.

Me too. I have never been able to get an answer from any of them that doesn't rely heavily on a "and then magic happens" premise. Michael cannot tell you in any meaningful way what is "big government" and how much government is too much government.
 
Pre-Obamacare Healthcare Reform System Wastes 30 Cents of Every Dollar Spent

The American healthcare system, before Obamacare, wastes 30% of ever dollar spent for healthcare services. And this is the healthcare system Republicans want to keep. It is painfully obvious that pay for service isn't working and it hasn't worked anywhere else for wealthy developed countries.

I am fortunate enough to have one of those platinum healthcare insurance policies. A few years ago I had the misfortune to being hospitalized. I can tell you first hand, I received tons of procedures...far more than I needed or wanted. But I had good healthcare insurance. So I got everything on the menu wither it made me healthier or hurt me. After I was discharged, I was back in another hospital within a few days because they forgot to prescribe the correct drugs on discharge, and this was the county trauma center and a training hospital. I was a revenue opportunity the hospital wasn't going to pass up.

'Study of U.S. Health Care System Finds Both Waste and Opportunity to Improve

By ANNIE LOWREY - New York Times

Published: September 11, 2012

WASHINGTON — The American medical system squanders 30 cents of every dollar spent on health care, according to new calculations by the respected Institute of Medicine. But in all that waste and misuse, policy experts and economists see a significant opportunity — a way to curb runaway health spending, to improve medical outcomes and even to put the economy on sounder footing. "

Fee for service isn't working. Pay needs to be based on results, and Obamacare is a step in that direction.
 
WASHINGTON — The American medical system squanders 30 cents of every dollar spent on health care, according to new calculations by the respected Institute of Medicine. Fee for service isn't working.
This is the inevitable outcome of a highly-regulated monopolistic rent-based market. Of course it's a mess. The free-market would never pay $50 for an aspirin or offer unnecessary procedures. Thanks to the State, our healthcare is totally screwed where we pay twice as much money for half the service. This is a problem made BY government, not the free-market. Healthcare is, next to finance, the most highly regulated market in the world.

Pay needs to be based on results, and Obamacare is a step in that direction.
No, pay needs to be based on value. Obamacare is a step in the wrong direct.

One more time, because I know this simple concept seems to elude you, I'll restate it again. Government differentiates itself from all other groups of humans in that is has the legal obligation to initiation force against innocent people (for examples of government's handiwork see: War on Drugs - where innocent adults are put in prison for smoking a weed in their yard, Tax on Workers - where innocent workers are put in prison for not paying for the privilege of working and of course now ObamaCare - where innocent people are penalized for not buying government ObamaCrap; in the future they too will be put in prison).


This is your argument Joe:
We need to Rape the people, to Love the people - for the Good of the Relationship. It's utterly nonsensical.
IOWs, when offered a chance to allow people the freedom to interact with one another voluntarily, you reject this offer in favor of initiating force against innocent people. You are, in effect, a sociopath or a child. A little whinny child who can't seem to grow up. Like a little baby whose mother used to provide you everything almost magically, you now want the State to do this magic trick for you. Well tough - it doesn't work that way. You don't get to hit people and take their stuff Joe. How hard is it to get that through your thick skull? Grow up and stop stealing - Jesus, is it THAT much of an ask? We could have wonderfully cheap effective healthcare - if people like yourselves would simply let others the freedom to volentarily interact with one anther within the law that protect property rights and with sound money. But nope. You just can't stand other's getting along without your nose right up their anus. Somehow you've gotten it into your head that because we're both "American" you get to tell me how to live my adult life. OK then - simply solution, end the union. See how easy that was Joe? Pretty f*cking easy and more than worth not having your nose in my arse.


Prosperity is free-time + civil liberties. We have just lost another civil liberty with ObamaCare and thus we have become a less prosperous nation. And we will continue to become a less prosperous nation. We will continue to be spied on - this MUST happen in order for Government to reach any semblance of efficiency and we must continue to lose more and more civil liberties become less and less prosperous. Oh, you're going to get ObamaCare, and in 25 years your local inner city public hospital will look just like you local inner city public school with 47% functional illiterate graduates who live in your inner city public slum housing project. Right now, 1 in 5 people are not receiving the 'care' they came into hospital and paid for and 1 in 12 are outright being harmed. Don't worry, it's going to be much much MUCH worse. I can promise you that much.

You once said I can move to Alaska - how about this, you love Europe so much, you think they have such a wonderful socialized society, good - move there. Our society is based on freedom from the State - it did not grow out of a monarchy. We do not need nor want a large State. But, sure, we're going to get one and with it we will become very poor and then it will die. It's too bad we have to leave a less prosperous poor nation to the next generation, but, History must repeat, people can not learn.

Oh, speaking of history repeating itself, I noticed your hero Krugman had brought up Keyen's Euthanasia of the Rentier. Isn't that interesting? One foot in front of the other - we'll get there eventually. ObamaCare, the NSA spying, the made-up Wars, bailing out the criminal banks with QEternity - all just baby-steps. Let's see how long before the State turns it's single unblinking eye onto the Rentiers and other's let with a bit of money when the State needs MOAR. I already know of people who saved their entire lives to buy a small house on a private lake - taxed right off them by the State of Michigan. Just think what the Federal Government is capable of. Oh I almost forgot, in AU I heard the State may start taxing fresh produce - how lovely of them to help the poor out like that.
 
Obamacare is a step in that direction.

It's a start in the right direction anyway Joe.....
As I have said previously Australia implemented a Universal health care system for all in 1972, under Gough Whitlam, our greatest ever PM, and who is still going strong at 97 years of age.
A known Atheist, he once was asked by a reporter, what he would do when he met his maker....Gough always quick with a reply, retorted "Why I will treat him as my equal" :)
 
michael said:
WASHINGTON — The American medical system squanders 30 cents of every dollar spent on health care, according to new calculations by the respected Institute of Medicine. Fee for service isn't working.
This is the inevitable outcome of a highly-regulated monopolistic rent-based market. Of course it's a mess. The free-market would never pay $50 for an aspirin or offer unnecessary procedures
None of the much more highly regulated, monopolistic health care systems on this planet have suffered that outcome - only the US, the most reliant on free market insurance and care provision, suffers that outcome.

In general, comparing comparable economics and demographics, the more tightly regulated and monopolistic the health care system the better and cheaper the care provided - everywhere on the planet. Meanwhile, on access, outcome, and cost basis (separately and together in any combination) the US has the worst health care system in the First World. So whatever has been distinguishing our system from other First World setups is to be viewed with suspicion, as a possible cause of our problem.
 
Michael

Your cartoon was right on one thing, wrong on another. The cancelled health plans were turkeys that didn't meet the standards all health care plans had to meet under the law, but it was the health insurance companies who cancelled them, not Obama, they knew they were going to cancel them at this time when they signed these people up for them. Cancelling these policies was the best thing the insurance companies did for them, most if not all will get better policies at lower costs on the exchanges. States as different as California and Kentucky are making this work, the rest will fall in line after 2014. Just like FDR and Johnson, Obama will be remembered fondly for bringing real relief from the greedy bastards in the health insurance industry.

Grumpy:cool:
 
This is the inevitable outcome of a highly-regulated monopolistic rent-based market. Of course it's a mess. The free-market would never pay $50 for an aspirin or offer unnecessary procedures. Thanks to the State, our healthcare is totally screwed where we pay twice as much money for half the service. This is a problem made BY government, not the free-market. Healthcare is, next to finance, the most highly regulated market in the world.

Wrong, deregulation nirvana is a myth promulgated by those who finance your ideology. If most people accept that myth, and should it become a reality, deregulation would allow those financers the ability to set up another Great Recession as they did just a few years ago with The Great Recession. It would allow them to fill our air, waters and land with their pollution, to rip off banks and taxpayers and everyone else. What you don’t understand, what you do not want to understand, is that regulation is the only constraint that can protect the less powerful from the wealthiest and the most powerful (e.g. your Koch brother libertarian financiers). Deregulation is not a cure for greed. On the contrary, deregulation sets up an environment where shysters can run free and prosper and without fear of retribution.

Another thing you do not understand is the healthcare market is intrinsically different from other markets. Let’s look at your $50 aspirin example. When you are ill enough to be hospitalized, are you in a position to negotiate aspirin prices with the hospital? Are you going to get up and go to the nearest pharmacy and pick up your aspirin? No you are not because you are flat on your back with IVs and monitors attached to you. And that is why hospitals can get by charging outrageous prices for even the simplest and cheapest goods and services. It has nothing to do with regulation. Deregulation does not cure greed as you and those like you think. In fact it makes it worse. And this gets back to my unanswered challenge to you. Given centuries of laissez faire and hundreds of countries, you cannot point to one example of a successful laissez faire healthcare system. I on the other hand can point to several healthcare systems that are much more efficient and effective than the pre-Obamacare US healthcare system.

One more time, because I know this simple concept seems to elude you, I'll restate it again. Government differentiates itself from all other groups of humans in that is has the legal obligation to initiation force against innocent people (for examples of government's handiwork see: War on Drugs - where innocent adults are put in prison for smoking a weed in their yard, Tax on Workers - where innocent workers are put in prison for not paying for the privilege of working and of course now ObamaCare - where innocent people are penalized for not buying government ObamaCrap; in the future they too will be put in prison).

Yeah we have been down this road many times before and it boils down to this, you have a rather unique and bizarre definition of force. You believe that whenever government enacts a law you don’t like, it suddenly “forcing innocent people”. We choose to live together, and in living together we need a set of rules. That is where government comes in. You may not like all the rules. I don’t like all the rules, but by choosing to live here we accept those rules. And short of remote Alaska, there probably is no populated place where everyone likes all the rules we live by. And let’s not forget to mention your bizarre and exceptional exaggeration of government punishments for breaking the rules (e.g. Obamacare and prison).

This is your argument Joe:
We need to Rape the people, to Love the people - for the Good of the Relationship. It's utterly nonsensical.
IOWs, when offered a chance to allow people the freedom to interact with one another voluntarily, you reject this offer in favor of initiating force against innocent people. You are, in effect, a sociopath or a child. A little whinny child who can't seem to grow up. Like a little baby whose mother used to provide you everything almost magically, you now want the State to do this magic trick for you. Well tough - it doesn't work that way. You don't get to hit people and take their stuff Joe. How hard is it to get that through your thick skull? Grow up and stop stealing - Jesus, is it THAT much of an ask? We could have wonderfully cheap effective healthcare - if people like yourselves would simply let others the freedom to volentarily interact with one anther within the law that protect property rights and with sound money. But nope. You just can't stand other's getting along without your nose right up their anus. Somehow you've gotten it into your head that because we're both "American" you get to tell me how to live my adult life. OK then - simply solution, end the union. See how easy that was Joe? Pretty f*cking easy and more than worth not having your nose in my arse.

Ah, no. That is you creating your usual straw man filled with oodles nonsensical crap.

Prosperity is free-time + civil liberties. We have just lost another civil liberty with ObamaCare and thus we have become a less prosperous nation. And we will continue to become a less prosperous nation. We will continue to be spied on - this MUST happen in order for Government to reach any semblance of efficiency and we must continue to lose more and more civil liberties become less and less prosperous. Oh, you're going to get ObamaCare, and in 25 years your local inner city public hospital will look just like you local inner city public school with 47% functional illiterate graduates who live in your inner city public slum housing project. Right now, 1 in 5 people are not receiving the 'care' they came into hospital and paid for and 1 in 12 are outright being harmed. Don't worry, it's going to be much much MUCH worse. I can promise you that much.

Yeah you can promise a lot, but here is the rub, you cannot deliver. And here is another problem for you; we do have other examples of Obamacare not only in the US but also in other countries. And unfortunately for you, it works. It works in Massachusetts and it works in Switzerland. And there are many more countries in which single payer systems (i.e. government run) work even better. And you cannot point to a single instance of a successful libertarian model past or present. History and facts suck if you are a Libertarian.

You once said I can move to Alaska - how about this, you love Europe so much, you think they have such a wonderful socialized society, good - move there. Our society is based on freedom from the State - it did not grow out of a monarchy. We do not need nor want a large State. But, sure, we're going to get one and with it we will become very poor and then it will die. It's too bad we have to leave a less prosperous poor nation to the next generation, but, History must repeat, people can not learn.

Well for starters, I didn’t say I loved Europe. But there may come a time when I do decide to move to Europe. I have kind of had my eye on Spain and Southern France. But that time is not now. And I don’t have a problem with our state or our central bank as you do.

And what I said was, if you were serious about living your libertarian purity, you would go to the outback of Alaska where you would not have to deal with “fiat” currency and the Federal Reserve or all the regulation which you find so offensive to your libertarian ideology. I went one step further by calling you a hypocrite for not migrating to the Alaskan outback where you could freely live out your libertarian ideology without using government services and government interference. No, instead you want to live with the rest of us while using and advantaging yourself of the government services you like to complain about.

You like to rail about big government, but you cannot provide a meaningful definition of what is big government or too big government. And the problem for you and your fellow libertarians, most people have learned from history and they are not too keen on repeating the mistakes of the past in order to fulfill libertarian fantasies.

Oh, speaking of history repeating itself, I noticed your hero Krugman had brought up Keyen's Euthanasia of the Rentier. Isn't that interesting? One foot in front of the other - we'll get there eventually. ObamaCare, the NSA spying, the made-up Wars, bailing out the criminal banks with QEternity - all just baby-steps. Let's see how long before the State turns it's single unblinking eye onto the Rentiers and other's let with a bit of money when the State needs MOAR. I already know of people who saved their entire lives to buy a small house on a private lake - taxed right off them by the State of Michigan. Just think what the Federal Government is capable of. Oh I almost forgot, in AU I heard the State may start taxing fresh produce - how lovely of them to help the poor out like that.

If only your libertarian fantasies and machinations resembled reality you might have something to really complain about.

Last week I wrote a couple of checks to the state for income and property taxes. I hated it. I always hate it. I pay a hell of a lot in income and property taxes every year – much more than most. I would much rather keep the money in my bank account. But I dutifully pay up. Because I owe it to the state, I don’t have kids in school. But my tax money is paying for someone else’s kids to go to school. But that is ok; it is the price I pay for living in this society. I choose to live here. I accept our laws and our government. If I don’t like something I use my constitutional rights to change things and improve them. I like the safety and stability provided by my government. And that is why I stay and that is why I pay.
 
None of the much more highly regulated, monopolistic health care systems on this planet have suffered that outcome - only the US, the most reliant on free market insurance and care provision, suffers that outcome.

In general, comparing comparable economics and demographics, the more tightly regulated and monopolistic the health care system the better and cheaper the care provided - everywhere on the planet. Meanwhile, on access, outcome, and cost basis (separately and together in any combination) the US has the worst health care system in the First World. So whatever has been distinguishing our system from other First World setups is to be viewed with suspicion, as a possible cause of our problem.
Again, your argument is this: The State is needed to initiate force against innocent individuals, to help those innocent individuals. Aside from being an oxymoron:

(a) This is immoral. Initiating force against innocent people IS IMMORAL. This is simple logic.
(b) Restricting civil liberty, forcing people to act against their free will is, by definition, a LESS prosperous nation. By definition. Again, simple logical deduction.
(c) If free people desire high quality healthcare at a low cost - then in a free society with sound money, the free market will respond to this demand and provide it. There are literally hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of students more than competent to provide medical goods and services who are not allowed to. This means millions of students are wasting decades of education to become wait-staff. Hundreds of billions of dollars, years, lives - all wasted.

Not that any of this matters, your argument is what it always is - you always want to resort to violence against innocent people. You default naturally to force and not voluntarism. Coercion and not free choice. You know those type of people who beat their wives and children "for their own good"? Um, they're insane. They're the sociopaths that make society a horrible place to live in.

But, as I've said before - lucky you. All the people around you think just like you do. Isn't that nice for you. So, a less prosperous, more expensive, lower quality healthcare to go along with our crappy public schooling, violent public housing slum projects, wars that continue to murder women and children, government spying immoral society.

A Great Society indeed.
 
Again, your argument is this: The State is needed to initiate force against innocent individuals, to help those innocent individuals. Aside from being an oxymoron:

(a) This is immoral. Initiating force against innocent people IS IMMORAL. This is simple logic.
(b) Restricting civil liberty, forcing people to act against their free will is, by definition, a LESS prosperous nation. By definition. Again, simple logical deduction.
(c) If free people desire high quality healthcare at a low cost - then in a free society with sound money, the free market will respond to this demand and provide it. There are literally hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of students more than competent to provide medical goods and services who are not allowed to. This means millions of students are wasting decades of education to become wait-staff. Hundreds of billions of dollars, years, lives - all wasted.

Not that any of this matters, your argument is what it always is - you always want to resort to violence against innocent people. You default naturally to force and not voluntarism. Coercion and not free choice. You know those type of people who beat their wives and children "for their own good"? Um, they're insane. They're the sociopaths that make society a horrible place to live in.

But, as I've said before - lucky you. All the people around you think just like you do. Isn't that nice for you. So, a less prosperous, more expensive, lower quality healthcare to go along with our crappy public schooling, violent public housing slum projects, wars that continue to murder women and children, government spying immoral society.

A Great Society indeed.

LOL, that is all hogwash Michael. You have an active imagination, I'll say that.
 
Back
Top