Repeal & Replace petition 81,000 signatures

[RodISHI]

Insurance/protection is also provided by mobsters and gangsters (they call them banksters now). The difference is the government used to call it racketeering. Now it is called commerce and our government is now in the business of forcing its citizens and even the companies they work for to pay for protection. It is called ACA which is nothing more than legalized forced protection which is legalized racketeering.

Single payer is still forced protection/insurance/racketeering.

 

[MarkClaude]

(3 above) dblack is wrong.

Our next bout with fascism is already sitting in the WH.

 

[RodISHI]

(3 above) dblack is wrong.

Our next bout with fascism is already sitting in the WH.

Actually that is not the case but you may not be able to see it.

 

[MarkClaude]

That is the case, indeed, Rodi, and fascism is bad Trumpstyle.

 

[RodISHI]

That is the case, indeed, Rodi, and fascism is bad Trumpstyle.

No its not but you can believe in that propaganda if you like, it won't change anything for you, it will just make you a miserable blind person even more so.

 

[The Derp]

If government becomes the single payer for doctors, doctors will be de facto employees of the government. The government will decide which services people "need" and how much they are worth. I don't know how you steer around that one.

Right now, private insurers already do that and they do that with an eye toward their bottom line, not your health. Government does not need to concern itself with the bottom line because government isn't there to make a profit. Government can be voted out, insurance company board members cannot. Regardless of who the payor is, someone will be making that determination. Would you rather it be made in a corporate board room, where you have no input and there's no accountability, or in the chambers of Congress, where you do by way of your vote? Seems like a clear choice to me. Arguing against it at this point is just foolish. Single payer is where we are headed, particularly if they repeal Obamacare and don't replace it with anything.

No, ACA notwithstanding, I don't. Neither do you. Open your eyes man, you're mired in a false dilemma.

So now you're just in the willful denial stage. You are willfully denying that you cannot predict what your health needs are going to be. So I suppose you think you're clairvoyant? Quick! What are tonight's Powerball numbers, oh Great dblackini? You cannot and will not be able to pay only cash until you become eligible for Medicare (ahem, government-run Medicare) because chances are you will have at least one major medical issue before you reach age 65 and can enroll in government-run Medicare.

No, it's your dream of ubiquitous government that's not in my best interest.

Even if the imagined ubiquitous government results in better and cheaper health care for you? Now you're just being silly.

 

[The Derp]

Who said that? It makes them employees of government. Worse, it makes government the only employer

No, it doesn't. Not any more than Boeing is a government-owned company because of its defense contracts. Again, the entity reimbursing doctors is what is socialized, not the doctors themselves. A single payer levels the playing field for doctors, forcing them to compete for your care by improving outcomes and reducing costs. If every doctor is reimbursed the same for a procedure, then the competition is among the doctors to attract patients. Isn't that what you want? Competition? How is there competition among providers in our current system?

That doesn't make them slaves. They don't have to practice medicine, and many won't.

Why? It doesn't matter to the physician who reimburses them, just that they are reimbursed. The private sector has had 80+ years to innovate better ways to reimburse providers and they haven't. So why would they magically start now? Because you wish it?

But it does restrict our freedom, and puts our health care under control of the government. Which is the point of the whole exercise.

You haven't said how. You equate administration with control. That's because, like Trump, you don't know what health insurance is.

Freedom doesn't work. Submit! Obey!

"Libertarians" are like house cats; convinced of their own independence but wholly dependent on others to survive.

 

[The Derp]

"1) Nothing inherently wrong with being a government employee." It is a big problem when these people believe that they are above the law and everyone else are nothing more than their subjects to do with at their will.

You think government workers think they're above the law? Are you applying Trump to all government workers? Why?

 

[The Derp]

If someone takes your money, and spends it on your behalf - on healthcare for example - they have very definitely restricted your freedom to spend that money as you see fit. If you think not, send me your money. I'll be happy to spend it for you!

That is what insurance companies already do! See, the problem with you people is that you don't know what health insurance is, you don't know what insurance companies do, and you don't know how it relates to health care delivery.

I'm arguing against granting government control of our health care. I think it's a dreadful mistake and will feed into our next bout with fascism.

Administration is not control. And we already live in a fascist health care system where a private company dictates which doctors you can and cannot see.

 

[The Derp]

Insurance/protection is also provided by mobsters and gangsters (they call them banksters now). The difference is the government used to call it racketeering. Now it is called commerce and our government is now in the business of forcing its citizens and even the companies they work for to pay for protection. It is called ACA which is nothing more than legalized forced protection which is legalized racketeering.Single payer is still forced protection/insurance/racketeering.

You're paying for those people without insurance anyway by way of premiums, co-pays, coinsurance, deductibles, or even when you pay cash. You think if you pay cash, that's the true price of the health care? Hell no. You are paying cash, and that cash is used to make up the difference in costs that stem from patients without insurance who get care. So you're paying for those people whether you realize it or not.

When someone without insurance incurs high medical costs and doesn't have the money to pay for it, where do you think those costs go? I seriously want to know...where do you think those costs go? Because I think you think they just disappear.

 

[The Derp]

Actually that is not the case but you may not be able to see it.

WHAT!? Are you crazy? Of course Trump's a fascist. He's using his position to profit at the expense of the nation. Doesn't get more fascist than that.

 

[RodISHI]

You think government workers think they're above the law? Are you applying Trump to all government workers? Why?

Some government workers do believe that they are above the law. I have seen what some have done and have had the experience to see what happens when corrupt government employees are allowed to get off without consequences for their actions.

Trump is an elected official not a government worker.

You're paying for those people without insurance anyway by way of premiums, co-pays, coinsurance, deductibles, or even when you pay cash. You think if you pay cash, that's the true price of the health care? Hell no. You are paying cash, and that cash is used to make up the difference in costs that stem from patients without insurance who get care. So you're paying for those people whether you realize it or not.

When someone without insurance incurs high medical costs and doesn't have the money to pay for it, where do you think those costs go? I seriously want to know...where do you think those costs go? Because I think you think they just disappear.

No due to the corruption that is systemic throughout I pay nothing at this point towards the care of anyone else through taxes unless you consider my property taxes which are minimal because we do not live in a very luxurious setting. When and if I had cash to pay for my own shots I kept the Epipen on hand so there actually would have been no extra emergency room cost. As far as where my tax dollar goes to now I suppose that they will have to use some of that money to pay for their new hospital that many people here did not want. With what lil' cash I can muster now I am treating myself naturally since the state WC system was willing to ignore the employers, their insurance companies obligations via fraud and deception. Due to the fact that the insurance company and state and their physco doctor would have preferred to poison me further with drugs and allow me to die on top of the damage caused by chemical exposure I suffered at work, I feel I am much better qualified and now much more well inform on how to treat myself so no one else is paying that bill either. See you really are totally making up shit that you have no clue about.

 

[RodISHI]

Actually that is not the case but you may not be able to see it.

WHAT!? Are you crazy? Of course Trump's a fascist. He's using his position to profit at the expense of the nation. Doesn't get more fascist than that.

Do use hyperbole and spread propaganda a lot?

 

[dblack]

If government becomes the single payer for doctors, doctors will be de facto employees of the government. The government will decide which services people "need" and how much they are worth. I don't know how you steer around that one.

Right now, private insurers already do that and they do that with an eye toward their bottom line, not your health.

We already went over this. You don't have to do business with insurance companies if you don't want to. Your doctor doesn't have to accept your insurance if she doesn't want to. We have no choice with government. You're stuck with whatever the idiot majority falls for.

No, ACA notwithstanding, I don't. Neither do you. Open your eyes man, you're mired in a false dilemma.

So now you're just in the willful denial stage. You are willfully denying that you cannot predict what your health needs are going to be.

Nope, didn't say that.

No, it's your dream of ubiquitous government that's not in my best interest.

Even if the imagined ubiquitous government results in better and cheaper health care for you? Now you're just being silly.

Even so, yes. Because "better" is entirely subjective. I don't want to get stuck with whatever nonsense the majority settles for.

 

[dblack]

That is what insurance companies already do! See, the problem with you people is that you don't know what health insurance is, you don't know what insurance companies do, and you don't know how it relates to health care delivery.

I think I do. Instead, I think that you, and frankly much of the nation, are taken with the delusion that health insurance can double as a social safety net. But it won't work.

I'm arguing against granting government control of our health care. I think it's a dreadful mistake and will feed into our next bout with fascism.

Administration is not control.

Of course it is. What kind of koolaid are you drinking?

And we already live in a fascist health care system where a private company dictates which doctors you can and cannot see.

When we dip into real fascism, you'll know it. You'll shit yourself and regret, deeply, supporting the bastards who take over.

When someone without insurance incurs high medical costs and doesn't have the money to pay for it, where do you think those costs go? I seriously want to know...where do you think those costs go? Because I think you think they just disappear.

In a free market those costs are absorbed voluntarily, by whatever benefactors are willing to front the money - and if the patient can't raise enough money to save their lives, yes, they could die. In fact, it's a 100% certainty that each of us will face that end.

On the other hand, if you're complaining about EMTALA, I'm right there with you. It should be repealed.

 

[The Derp]

Some government workers do believe that they are above the law. I have seen what some have done and have had the experience to see what happens when corrupt government employees are allowed to get off without consequences for their actions.

Such as who? And you don't think the private sector has corruption? What about all the fraud last decade on Wall Street? What about the fact that Aetna lied about their reasons for leaving the Obamacare exchanges? What about Exxon knowing forty years ago that carbon pollution is a major contributor to global warning? What about tobacco companies pretending that cigarettes don't give you lung cancer? What about private prison companies that steal from taxpayers while abusing prisoners? What about the sugar industry that lied about fat and tarnished the reputation of a scientist who was right about sugar's adverse affects on American consumers?

You said yourself that these companies routinely traffic in corruption and misbehavior, yet you have a bug up your butt about government workers, of whom you still haven't really said do the things you accuse them of doing? Why?

Trump is an elected official not a government worker.

What's the difference?

No due to the corruption that is systemic throughout I pay nothing at this point towards the care of anyone else through taxes unless you consider my property taxes which are minimal because we do not live in a very luxurious setting.

Wrong. Whether you realize it or not, you are paying for someone else's care when you pay cash for health care. Furthermore, what happens in the event you cannot afford to pay cash for health care? Then what? Should you just die? Should you trade chickens for health care? What do you do if you find yourself in such a position. Since most major medical issues are something entirely out of your control, how can you possibly think you can glide along paying cash until you become eligible for government-run Medicare? Because I don't believe for a second you won't take Medicare when you are eligible.

When and if I had cash to pay for my own shots I kept the Epipen on hand so there actually would have been no extra emergency room cost. As far as where my tax dollar goes to now I suppose that they will have to use some of that money to pay for their new hospital that many people here did not want.

So all of this is anecdotal which immediately throws it into question. People didn't want a hospital near them? Really? I find that hard to believe. And you're saying it was a state hospital, not a private one? Well, the state wouldn't build a hospital unless there was a need for it. You're lucky because many states are shutting down their hospitals thanks to state legislature death panels, like the one here in GA that shut down a couple rural hospitals in the central part of the state because they refused to expand Medicaid.

With what lil' cash I can muster now I am treating myself naturally since the state WC system was willing to ignore the employers, their insurance companies obligations via fraud and deception.

Well, that's a pretty big risk on your part, and you're not only putting yourself at risk, but you're putting everyone else at risk in the event you have a major medical issue that requires you to be hospitalized. Because there's no way you'd be able to afford the cost of a hospital stay out of your own pocket. So you're very selfishly taking advantage of everyone else who have taken personal responsibility and got themselves insurance. What would you call someone like that? I'd call them a moocher.

Due to the fact that the insurance company and state and their physco doctor would have preferred to poison me further with drugs and allow me to die on top of the damage caused by chemical exposure I suffered at work, I feel I am much better qualified and now much more well inform on how to treat myself so no one else is paying that bill either. See you really are totally making up shit that you have no clue about.

OK, so when it comes to workplace compensation for injury or disability, that's an entirely different beast than merely having health insurance. That sounds like an issue for your work-comp, and my advice is to sue in order to get compensation for what happened to you. But what happened to you is not an indictment of government-run health insurance.

 

[The Derp]

Do use hyperbole and spread propaganda a lot?

So Trump isn't having foreign dignitaries stay at his hotels? Do you think they stay for free? Do you think the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia gets his room at Trump's DC hotel gratis? No. They pay for it, and that money goes right into Trump's pocket. That's fascism.

 

[The Derp]

We already went over this. You don't have to do business with insurance companies if you don't want to. Your doctor doesn't have to accept your insurance if she doesn't want to. We have no choice with government. You're stuck with whatever the idiot majority falls for.

Yes, you do unless you're going to be a moocher and take advantage of everyone else's personal responsibility. There is no way in hell you can afford hospitalization out of pocket. And if you think you're getting a discount, all you're doing is taking advantage of those who have insurance, who now have to pay higher premiums to make up for the reimbursement gap that comes from hospitals having to charge exorbitant rates for health care to make up for the generous break you got. So my insurance premium increases because you got a discount at the hospital. Everything has to be paid for. Most people cannot afford to pay for health care out of pocket, and you not having insurance is a huge risk, particularly if the provider isn't feeling generous that particular day and doesn't give you a discount.

BTW - when you pay for health care, when does that transaction happen? Before treatment or after treatment? Because a doctor's visit is one thing, but if you then need a procedure, that gets paid after, not before.

Nope, didn't say that.

Ummm...yes. That is what you said. Just because you didn't use those exact words doesn't mean it wasn't your intent. What would you do if you suddenly had a major medical issue you couldn't afford to pay out of pocket? That's not a rhetorical question.

Even so, yes. Because "better" is entirely subjective. I don't want to get stuck with whatever nonsense the majority settles for.

Even if that nonsense ends up benefiting you personally? How is that not working against your own best interests?

 

[The Derp]

I think I do. Instead, I think that you, and frankly much of the nation, are taken with the delusion that health insurance can double as a social safety net. But it won't work.

The entire point of health insurance is a safety net. My God...this is what I am talking about when I say you folks don't even know what health insurance is. It's a safety net because it can pay for medical costs you cannot pay for yourself. Very few, if any people can afford a simple hospitalization for appendicitis. You know how much treating appendicitis costs? The average appendicitis surgery costs $33,000. So how are you to afford that without health insurance? And that's one of the cheaper procedures.

Of course it is. What kind of koolaid are you drinking?

How, then? All health insurance administrators do is move money from the premium pool you've already paid into, to your provider. That's it. That is the process you don't want to see socialized because...because...that amounts to control, somehow, though you haven't really said how.

When we dip into real fascism, you'll know it. You'll shit yourself and regret, deeply, supporting the bastards who take over.

We already live in a fascist state. Trump is a fascist. He is using government to profit at our expense. Having foreign dignitaries stay at his hotels is fascism. He is using the state to make money for his own private, corporate interests. That is textbook fascism. He even puts his fucking name on the hotels. I mean, really man...come on. Get a grip.

In a free market those costs are absorbed voluntarily, by whatever benefactors are willing to front the money - and if the patient can't raise enough money to save their lives, yes, they could die. In fact, it's a 100% certainty that each of us will face that end.

So your health care plan is; Don't get sick. And if you do get sick, die quickly. So when Alan Grayson accused you all of that 5 years ago, there was a collective pants-shitting from the right-wing. Now, your position is exactly what he said it was. Unbelievable. So you're saying we should rely on the kindness of strangers to help us when we get sick? How's that worked out for society?

 

[dblack]

Yes, you do unless you're going to be a moocher and take advantage of everyone else's personal responsibility.

Simply not true. Your binary worldview is delusional.

What would you do if you suddenly had a major medical issue you couldn't afford to pay out of pocket? That's not a rhetorical question.

It's none of your business. That's not a smart-ass answer. Take it literally.

Even so, yes. Because "better" is entirely subjective. I don't want to get stuck with whatever nonsense the majority settles for.

Even if that nonsense ends up benefiting you personally? How is that not working against your own best interests?

You don't know what 'subjective' means, do you?