New, Improved Obamacare Program Released On 35 Floppy Disks

Oh, and...

"But it’s a false dichotomy to separate business issues from social issues. Peter Drucker wrote: “One is responsible for one’s impacts, whether they are intended or not. This is the first rule. There is no doubt regarding management’s responsibility for the social impacts of its organization.” Even as a pure “business issue,” engagement with social problems is justified. The business community has learned over the past three decades that, sooner or later, a company’s track record on social issues will affect its business. Consumers will demand that Apple’s Chinese workers be treated fairly, that P&G’s post-consumer waste not end up in landfills, or that Tyson’s chickens be hormone free, well beyond what is required by regulation. Meanwhile, the world’s largest companies have begun to understand that their viability depends on a healthy world. As The New York Times reports, Coca-Cola and Nike have come to see climate change as a threat to their ability to source the materials they need cost-effectively and reliably. Business by now has a well-developed playbook for dealing with such sustainability issues.
It’s time to recognize that income inequality is a sustainability issue, too."

Christopher Meyer and Julia Kirby (Harvard Business review)

Grumpy:cool:
 
Michael said:
Nice one Joe, you should go work for Faux News.

Audio Link HERE

Let me pull a few quotes out for you:
"I'm afraid that the millennials, if you will, are less likely to sign up. I think they feel more independent, I think they feel a little more invulnerable than prior generations, but I don't think we're going to get enough young people signing up to make this bill work as it was intended to financially." (AKA - stick them with their grandparents [who own 80% of all assets, equities and property] medical bills).

"And, frankly, there's some legitimacy to their concern because the government spends about $7 for the elderly for every $1 it spends on the young"

"I just don't know how we're going to do it frankly" (by 'do it' he means stick the young with more of their selfish self-centered grandparents bills).
"If we had a solution I'd be telling the president right now." (oh, there's a 'solution' it's called tax the middle class more and hit the poor with inflation as the State monetizes the debt through the Fed with more inflation/screw-the-poor-tax).

$8.5 Trillion WASTED losing two more Wars - good god damn we're lucky to have the Federal Government looking after our well-being. Just remember, you don't get the Big Government without losing your Civil Liberties and Privacy Rights. Good Ole' "Progressive" Obama - sure don't see him repealing the "Patriot" Act now do you? ObamaCare is a good distraction though, as the State steals what little the poor had. Speaking of which, I have an idea, how about we take everything away from everyone over the age of 50 and 'redistribute' equally - that'd be the fairest. Don't you think so Joe?
Click to expand...
The issue of younger people not signing up for the ACA can be addressed through public relations campaigns, the same way we addressed smoking. It's only a problem of psychology.
 
Michael said:
New Scientist: Counting the hidden victims of medicine


Take a good look at the mediocrity and near uselessness of a Public "High" school diploma, now combine this with a shit-smear of a Public Housing slum-project and the ineptitude and nepotism seen of Alan "Bubbles" Greenspan - you'll only wish it were the third leading cause of death. I promise, you will NOT want treated at a Public Hospital in the USSA circa 2035. You'll see, I think many of you will be taking a chance with a friend of a friend and iPhone20 app.
Click to expand...
With that defeatist attitude we wouldn't have public education at all, something which has demonstrably increased the literacy of the population to an extraordinary degree.
 
Michael said:
Nice one Joe, you should go work for Faux News.

Audio Link HERE

Let me pull a few quotes out for you:
"I'm afraid that the millennials, if you will, are less likely to sign up. I think they feel more independent, I think they feel a little more invulnerable than prior generations, but I don't think we're going to get enough young people signing up to make this bill work as it was intended to financially." (AKA - stick them with their grandparents [who own 80% of all assets, equities and property] medical bills).

"And, frankly, there's some legitimacy to their concern because the government spends about $7 for the elderly for every $1 it spends on the young"

"I just don't know how we're going to do it frankly" (by 'do it' he means stick the young with more of their selfish self-centered grandparents bills).
"If we had a solution I'd be telling the president right now." (oh, there's a 'solution' it's called tax the middle class more and hit the poor with inflation as the State monetizes the debt through the Fed with more inflation/screw-the-poor-tax).
Click to expand...

LOL, well once we get the credible source, as usual, we find that your original post was more than a little disingenuous. He didn’t say anything new. He didn’t say anything radical. Many people, including myself, feel that a single payer system would be much better than Obamacare. But that doesn’t change the fact that Obamacare is light-years better than our previous healthcare system.

The man has concerns about the millennial being responsible law abiding citizens. Frankly I have more faith in the millennial generation. And in Massachusetts, where this plan was implemented years ago, they found no such problems.

Michael said:
$8.5 Trillion WASTED losing two more Wars - good god damn we're lucky to have the Federal Government looking after our well-being. Just remember, you don't get the Big Government without losing your Civil Liberties and Privacy Rights. Good Ole' "Progressive" Obama - sure don't see him repealing the "Patriot" Act now do you? ObamaCare is a good distraction though, as the State steals what little the poor had. Speaking of which, I have an idea, how about we take everything away from everyone over the age of 50 and 'redistribute' equally - that'd be the fairest. Don't you think so Joe?
Click to expand...

Yeah, we got that you don’t like government and you love demagoguery…got it. I got that years ago.
 
joepistole said:
Yeah, we got that you don’t like government and you love demagoguery…got it. I got that years ago.
Click to expand...
You may need to look up the word demagoguery, you're using it incorrectly. But don't worry Joe, we're going to get a lot more Government - a LOT more. We will continue to lose our Civil Liberties, we'll pay more in tax, let's hope we're both around to watch as The People, vote for 'equality' and start taxing the property off the top 49% - that should be fun to watch. How does a 99% tax on rentals sound?
You ARE for equality aren't you?
Of course you are - you love your fellow "American" and would only be all too happy to see an 'Equality Tax' finally come to the USSA :)

Anyway, there's nothing new going in the USSA, all of this has happened before, and will probably happen again. Plato writes about exactly what's happening in The Republic. All just part of the Human Condition and until we raise a generation of children who actually internalize the concepts Do not hit and Do not steal - and apply these as adults, then we'll live it again and again. That isn't going to happen any time too soon now is it?

"When a self-governing people confer upon their government the power to take money from some and give it to others, the process will not stop until the last bone of the last taxpayer is picked bare."
-- Howard E. Kershne



As for Obamacare, as I stated, iatrogenic death is the third killer of Americans - that's NOW, under the Fascistic AMA Model, just wait until we're under Single Payer AMA model, then you'll want to go to a Public Hospital about as much as you'd like to go live in a Public Housing project. I think you'll find with an iPhone app, many Americans would rather take a chance at home with a friend of a friend, some tape and illicit pain-killers. But hey, thank the Gods we have Government wasting $8.5 losing a couple more Wars in the middle east KEEPING US SAFE from "Terrorists". Thank the Gods we have a President more than happy to spy ON AMERICANS to KEEP US SAFE from "Terrorsts". Let's see Joe, the IF Wars were won by our illustrious CONmander in Chief, then WHY do we still live under the rules of War? Why do we still have the PATRIOT ACT? Why is the State spending billions on Spying on Citizens?


You don't get to have low-quality over-priced GovernmentCare AND keep your Civil Liberties and Privacy, those are the trade-offs for the delusion you want to live in.
 
Michael said:
You may need to look up the word demagoguery, you're using it incorrectly. But don't worry Joe, we're going to get a lot more Government - a LOT more. We will continue to lose our Civil Liberties, we'll pay more in tax, let's hope we're both around to watch as The People, vote for 'equality' and start taxing the property off the top 49% - that should be fun to watch. How does a 99% tax on rentals sound?
You ARE for equality aren't you?
Of course you are - you love your fellow "American" and would only be all too happy to see an 'Equality Tax' finally come to the USSA :)

Anyway, there's nothing new going in the USSA, all of this has happened before, and will probably happen again. Plato writes about exactly what's happening in The Republic. All just part of the Human Condition and until we raise a generation of children who actually internalize the concepts Do not hit and Do not steal - and apply these as adults, then we'll live it again and again. That isn't going to happen any time too soon now is it?

"When a self-governing people confer upon their government the power to take money from some and give it to others, the process will not stop until the last bone of the last taxpayer is picked bare."
-- Howard E. Kershne



As for Obamacare, as I stated, iatrogenic death is the third killer of Americans - that's NOW, under the Fascistic AMA Model, just wait until we're under Single Payer AMA model, then you'll want to go to a Public Hospital about as much as you'd like to go live in a Public Housing project. I think you'll find with an iPhone app, many Americans would rather take a chance at home with a friend of a friend, some tape and illicit pain-killers. But hey, thank the Gods we have Government wasting $8.5 losing a couple more Wars in the middle east KEEPING US SAFE from "Terrorists". Thank the Gods we have a President more than happy to spy ON AMERICANS to KEEP US SAFE from "Terrorsts". Let's see Joe, the IF Wars were won by our illustrious CONmander in Chief, then WHY do we still live under the rules of War? Why do we still have the PATRIOT ACT? Why is the State spending billions on Spying on Citizens?


You don't get to have low-quality over-priced GovernmentCare AND keep your Civil Liberties and Privacy, those are the trade-offs for the delusion you want to live in.
Click to expand...

LOL, no I am not using the word incorrectly Michael. You may not like it. But it is the truth.
 
joepistole said:
LOL, no I am not using the word incorrectly Michael. You may not like it. But it is the truth.
Click to expand...
I'm not a politician Joe, so I have no idiots to demagogue. If I were a politician, that'd mean I was elected, which would mean I would be forced into demagoguery by promising the nearly illiterate voting public "I" will give them cheap healthcare (See: Obama), and "I" will give them minimum wage hikes (See: Obama), and that "I" was going to "create jobs" (See: Obama) and all the other promises and goodies that crooks have to say and use to get elected from the immoral general voting class (See: Mirror) - oh, and when that was done, I'd have to promise to keep these idiots safe from Terrorists (See: Bush Jr and Obama) by using the NSA only for the "Good of the Nation" (See: Obama). AND, if anyone argued with me I'd say something like: You use the roads (See: Grumpy). Or, you don't care about the poor (See: Mirror). Or, no one has a choice in being sick (See: Write4U). Or, if you have a good business, you didn't build that, other's did that (See: Obama).

So, no Joe, I'm not a demagogue. For, if I were a demagogue, I'd have you lapping it up like a lap-dog right out of the palm of my hand - that much I promise you.

Lucky for you, I have too much integrity to be a demagogue :)
 
Michael

I'm not a politician Joe, so I have no idiots to demagogue.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are, with a constituency of one(hopefully). Given what you post I get the impression you are actually quite ill. The kind of distorted logic, poisonous hatred and near sociopathic lack of empathy can't be good for your mental health. A lot of the logic you use is similar to the coddled billionaire's, who compared the billions of little people being upset that 85 complete buttheads own half of the world's wealth(that they produced)to Kristallnacht, while the majority of them live in grinding poverty. When you have to build barbwire enclosures to keep your workers from leaving they are slaves even if you pay them 25 cents an hour. That's what the faux Libertarianism being pushed by Koch brother's money is about, trying to bring the United States down to the level of the rest of the world. Your personal problem is you've bought the idiotic crap as being anything other than cover for unadultrated personal greed for money and the power it buys. They succeeded in a complete purchase of the Republican party, but they still don't own all of our political system yet. They spent 400 mil just in 2012, but they got little in return. And gave you brain damage as well, it seems. It's called "Obama Derangement Syndrome"...

For, if I were a demagogue, I'd have you lapping it up like a lap-dog right out of the palm of my hand - that much I promise you.

Lucky for you, I have too much integrity to be a demagogue
Click to expand...

...and you've lost touch with reality, as well.

Grumpy:cool:
 
Michael said:
I'm not a politician Joe, so I have no idiots to demagogue. If I were a politician, that'd mean I was elected, which would mean I would be forced into demagoguery by promising the nearly illiterate voting public "I" will give them cheap healthcare (See: Obama), and "I" will give them minimum wage hikes (See: Obama), and that "I" was going to "create jobs" (See: Obama) and all the other promises and goodies that crooks have to say and use to get elected from the immoral general voting class (See: Mirror) - oh, and when that was done, I'd have to promise to keep these idiots safe from Terrorists (See: Bush Jr and Obama) by using the NSA only for the "Good of the Nation" (See: Obama). AND, if anyone argued with me I'd say something like: You use the roads (See: Grumpy). Or, you don't care about the poor (See: Mirror). Or, no one has a choice in being sick (See: Write4U). Or, if you have a good business, you didn't build that, other's did that (See: Obama).

So, no Joe, I'm not a demagogue. For, if I were a demagogue, I'd have you lapping it up like a lap-dog right out of the palm of my hand - that much I promise you.

Lucky for you, I have too much integrity to be a demagogue :)
Click to expand...

LOL, you don't have to be a politician to lie, to mislead, to overlook the truth.
 
I can see some of the poster's here have lost the plot - yet again.

One more time, "I" believe in:
1) Not initiating violence against innocent people.
2) Protecting private property.
3) Not stealing.
4) Sound money.
5) Law
6) Civil Liberty.
7) Personal Privacy
8) The right to freely interact with other free people.


Many of you believe in:
1) Initiating violence against innocent people "for the good of the nation" (example: War on Drugs).
2) Violating private property "for the good of the nation" (example: Putting a person in prison for offering veterinarian services without 'State' licencing).
3) Stealing "for the good of the nation" (example: Income tax).
4) Fiat Currency "for the good of the nation". (example: Federal Reserve Bank Notes backed by State-Force and valued added by Taxing the Labor of Workers and selling Bonds on their Children's future labor).
5) Usurping Law with Federal Regulation to "keep people safe for the good of the nation". (example: FDA taxing raisin farmers 'for the good of the nation').
6) Violating Civil Liberty "for the good of the nation" (examples: See above)
7) Violating personal privacy "to keep the nation safe from terrorists" (example: See NSA)
8) Using the State to regulate all interaction between so-called 'Citizens' (examples: Everything from State regulation of marriage to rent-seeking and other licensing schemes - you now require a licence in Texas to service a computer, you know, "for the good of the nation").


Oh, I also believe that spanking a child is unlawful and unlike those people who think hitting children is "good for the nation" have scientific evidence that show it actually reduces IQ.
Oh, I also believe that teaching a child to think logically is important.
Oh, I also believe that day supervision centers where mother's put their 6 WEEK old infant during it's fourth trimester is destroying the lives of many many children - who are promptly put on variolus SSRI's, stuffed into a Government "Education" program for 12 years and forgotten about.


As I said, take a good look at the value of a Government "High" School degree, combine this with the quality expected from Government Housing Slum Projects and this is what Government Healthcare will look like in 15-20 years time. Which is what you people want. Good for you, you're going to get it.


Oh, and as for this "When you have to build barbwire enclosures to keep your workers from leaving they are slaves even if you pay them 25 cents an hour. " Maybe you missed the memo - you are not allowed to leave your cage without proper Government papers and without payment to said Government. You are Tax Cattle - and without your State sanctioned papers, you are not leaving your Farm. Got that? Maybe you don't see the barbed-wired that encloses your little tiny Farm? I'll tell you what - why don't you prove me wrong, and attempt to waddle your arse out of your Tax Farm. Go on - give it a try. But, we both know you're not about to do that now are you? If you did, you'd find it is impossible to do so. Back in your cage you'd go - "for the Good of the Nation". And "your" so-called 'money'. You may be allowed to take a pittance, say $10,000. But that's not "your" money. That's "The People's" Money / The State's Money. So, IF you did get your Owner's approval and paperwork, and you did pay your Owner for the privilege to leave the Tax-Farm for a short trip over to another Tax Farm, you won't freely taking "Your" money with you - because it's not actually yours. Maybe I should speak in Cattle? Moo Moo Moo.... Moo moo mooo mooo mooo....



Now, let's watch as our Central Planners over at our Central Bank work hand-in-glove with the Central Government to destroy what's left of the USD. And when they do, you'll see just how free you aren't "For the Good of the Nation".
 
Workers find out about their new improved medical insurance under Obamacare:

[video=youtube_share;UuA2_P-m4Sk]http://youtu.be/UuA2_P-m4Sk[/video]
 
madanthonywayne said:
Workers find out about their new improved medical insurance under Obamacare:
Click to expand...

This has all the earmarks of another more Republican fictionalized anti-Obamacare nonsense (e.g. Hannity's nonsense). Expensive healthcare didn't begin with Obamacare. Actually the growth in healthcare costs have begun to mitigate under Obamacare. I have a corporate healthcare plan and the differential between my corporate "gold" plan and a private Obamacare policy is virtually nothing.
 
Obamacare Plans Cheaper Than Employer Plans

"The phrase "sticker shock" has made headlines in stories about individual Obamacare enrollees, but premium prices for health insurance plans sold on Obamacare exchanges nationally are actually about the same—and in some cases cheaper—than premiums for comparable employer-offered plans, a new analysis reveals." http://www.cnbc.com/id/101374271
 
ASA_Logo10.jpg


Primary Payer Status Affects Mortality For Major Surgical Operations
*Damien J LaPar, *Castigliano M. Bhamidipati, *Carlos M Mery, *George J Stukenborg, David R Jones, Bruce D Schirmer, Irving L Kron, MD, *Gorav Ailawadi, MD
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA

Objectives: Medicaid and Uninsured populations are a significant focus of current healthcare reform. We hypothesized that outcomes following major surgical operations in the United States is dependent on primary payer status.
Methods: From 2003-2007, 893,658 major surgical operations were evaluated using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database: lung resection, esophagectomy, colectomy, pancreatectomy, gastrectomy, abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, hip replacement, and coronary artery bypass. Patients were stratified by primary payer status: Medicare (n=491,829), Medicaid (n=40,259), Private Insurance (n=337,535), and Uninsured (n=24,035). Multivariate regression models were applied to assess outcomes.
Results: Unadjusted mortality for Medicare (4.4%, OR= 3.51), Medicaid (3.7%, OR: 2.86) and Uninsured (3.2%, OR: 2.51) patient groups were higher compared to Private Insurance groups (1.3%, p<0.001). Moreover, mortality was lowest for Private Insurance patients independent of operation. Importantly, after controlling for age, gender, income, geographic region, operation, and 30 comorbid conditions, Medicaid payer status was associated with the longest length of stay and highest total costs (p<0.001). In addition, Medicaid (p<0.001) and Uninsured (p<0.001) payer status independently conferred the highest adjusted risks of mortality (Table 1).
Click to expand...

Surgical patients on Government Insurance / Medicaid at a cost to the tax payer of $100 Billion every year are 13% more likely to die than those with no insurance at all, and 97% more likely to die than those with private insurance.

WSJ
• Major surgical procedures: Of 893,658 major surgical operations between 2003 to 2007 and published in the Annals of Surgery, found that being on Medicaid was associated with the longest length of stay, the most total hospital costs, and the highest risk of death. Medicaid patients were almost twice as likely to die in the hospital than those with private insurance. By comparison, uninsured patients were about 25% less likely than those with Medicaid to have an "in-hospital death." Another recent study found similar outcomes for Medicaid patients undergoing trauma surgery.

• Poor outcomes after heart procedures: A 2011 study of 13,573 patients, published in the American Journal of Cardiology, found that people with Medicaid who underwent coronary angioplasty (a procedure to open clogged heart arteries) were 59% more likely to have "major adverse cardiac events," such as strokes and heart attacks, compared with privately insured patients. Medicaid patients were also more than twice as likely to have a major, subsequent heart attack after angioplasty as were patients who didn't have any health insurance at all.

• Lung transplants: A 2011 study of 11,385 patients undergoing lung transplants for pulmonary diseases, published in the Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, found that Medicaid patients were 8.1% less likely to survive 10 years after the surgery than their privately insured and uninsured counterparts. Medicaid insurance status was a significant, independent predictor of death after three years—even after controlling for other clinical factors that could increase someone's risk of poor outcomes.
 
Michael said:
ASA_Logo10.jpg


Primary Payer Status Affects Mortality For Major Surgical Operations
*Damien J LaPar, *Castigliano M. Bhamidipati, *Carlos M Mery, *George J Stukenborg, David R Jones, Bruce D Schirmer, Irving L Kron, MD, *Gorav Ailawadi, MD
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA



Surgical patients on Government Insurance / Medicaid at a cost to the tax payer of $100 Billion every year are 13% more likely to die than those with no insurance at all, and 97% more likely to die than those with private insurance.

WSJ
• Major surgical procedures: Of 893,658 major surgical operations between 2003 to 2007 and published in the Annals of Surgery, found that being on Medicaid was associated with the longest length of stay, the most total hospital costs, and the highest risk of death. Medicaid patients were almost twice as likely to die in the hospital than those with private insurance. By comparison, uninsured patients were about 25% less likely than those with Medicaid to have an "in-hospital death." Another recent study found similar outcomes for Medicaid patients undergoing trauma surgery.

• Poor outcomes after heart procedures: A 2011 study of 13,573 patients, published in the American Journal of Cardiology, found that people with Medicaid who underwent coronary angioplasty (a procedure to open clogged heart arteries) were 59% more likely to have "major adverse cardiac events," such as strokes and heart attacks, compared with privately insured patients. Medicaid patients were also more than twice as likely to have a major, subsequent heart attack after angioplasty as were patients who didn't have any health insurance at all.

• Lung transplants: A 2011 study of 11,385 patients undergoing lung transplants for pulmonary diseases, published in the Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, found that Medicaid patients were 8.1% less likely to survive 10 years after the surgery than their privately insured and uninsured counterparts. Medicaid insurance status was a significant, independent predictor of death after three years—even after controlling for other clinical factors that could increase someone's risk of poor outcomes.
Click to expand...

LOL, Michael, Michael, Michael, what am I going to do with you? Everyone in US over 65 is covered by Medicare. So where is your private insured counterpart for this study? You have none. That means the conclusions you published are bogus. And those under 65 who are covered have other medical problems and are disabled. This is yet another in a long series of bogus papers you have referenced. Medicaid and Medicare patients are higher risk from the get go. So you cannot compare them to lower risk groups and draw the conclusions they did. It's comparing apples to oranges. And the author of the WSJ article was, not surprisingly, an employee of American Enterprise Institute, a very partisan Koch funded group. This is just partisan bull crap.

That facts are state funded medical care in other countries in Europe and Canada is better that care provided in the US. And there are legitimate studies to back that up.
 
joepistole said:
LOL, Michael, Michael, Michael, what am I going to do with you? Everyone in US over 65 is covered by Medicare. So where is your private insured counterpart for this study? You have none. That means the conclusions you published are bogus. And those under 65 who are covered have other medical problems and are disabled. This is yet another in a long series of bogus papers you have referenced. Medicaid and Medicare patients are higher risk from the get go. So you cannot compare them to lower risk groups and draw the conclusions they did. This is just partisan bull crap.
Click to expand...

One Michael is enough in this world, and you lot can keep him!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top