SHould the mandate or the entire bill go?

[Dr.House]

There is a flaw in your theory too, the govt's track record in this type of thing.

Why look at the Post Office or Amtrak, which are in totally other areas? Why not look at the single-payer system we already have: Medicare?

Poll: Medicare, Medicaid among most popular gov't services - News Breaks - Front Page - Chain Drug Review :: Reporter for the Chain Drug Store Industry

Don’t mess with medicare, poll | Strange Bedfellows — Politics News - seattlepi.com

Wonkbook: 84 percent oppose Ryan’s Medicare plan - The Washington Post

Poll: Most Americans say Medicare is worth the cost - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

Seems to me that the U.S. government, like other governments of other advanced nations, is perfectly capable of running a single-payer health-care system that people are very happy with. Since Medicare would work much better if it were expanded to cover everyone (it would then have the leverage to keep the cost of medical care down), there's every reason to believe it would be much MORE popular even than it is now.

It wouldn't even cost that much more, and might actually cost less. Medicare is already covering the most at-risk population, the ones most expensive to cover (old people), and since it would be better positioned to control medical care inflation if expanded to cover everyone, while at the same time the rest of the population would be much less expensive (per person) to cover than people over 65, the total cost of the program might actually go DOWN.

It's the sensible thing to do.

Excellent point, look at how overbudget medicare is. We have to borrow money from china just to pay for it already.

Thanks for giving me a 3rd piece of ammunition for that specific argument!

EDIT: Oh and social security too

No kidding...

I'd like someone to tell me exactly which government agency is run as an efficient and well-oiled machine...

 

[occupied]

I forgot. Who insured the colonists? Who were their healthcare providers?

They didn't have any and died young from preventable diseases, you know, the republican health plan.

 

[DiamondDave]

The whole bill should be struck down and then sent back to congress to draft a constitutional bill that actually does something about healthcare.

Exactly. And the only thing that would do that would be a single-payer system.

We are not going to be able to preserve our health care system and insurance companies' profits both, one of them will have to go.

Yeah.. that's a precedent you want to set....

We can't preserve our food industry and their profits... lets have the government take over that too.... and the auto industry (oh wait, that has already begun).... and the tech industry.... and the housing industry...

Hail your central government overlords

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

There is a flaw in your theory too, the govt's track record in this type of thing.

Why look at the Post Office or Amtrak, which are in totally other areas? Why not look at the single-payer system we already have: Medicare?

Poll: Medicare, Medicaid among most popular gov't services - News Breaks - Front Page - Chain Drug Review :: Reporter for the Chain Drug Store Industry

Don’t mess with medicare, poll | Strange Bedfellows — Politics News - seattlepi.com

Wonkbook: 84 percent oppose Ryan’s Medicare plan - The Washington Post

Poll: Most Americans say Medicare is worth the cost - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

Seems to me that the U.S. government, like other governments of other advanced nations, is perfectly capable of running a single-payer health-care system that people are very happy with. Since Medicare would work much better if it were expanded to cover everyone (it would then have the leverage to keep the cost of medical care down), there's every reason to believe it would be much MORE popular even than it is now.

It wouldn't even cost that much more, and might actually cost less. Medicare is already covering the most at-risk population, the ones most expensive to cover (old people), and since it would be better positioned to control medical care inflation if expanded to cover everyone, while at the same time the rest of the population would be much less expensive (per person) to cover than people over 65, the total cost of the program might actually go DOWN.

It's the sensible thing to do.

Excellent point, look at how overbudget medicare is. We have to borrow money from china just to pay for it already.

Thanks for giving me a 3rd piece of ammunition for that specific argument!

EDIT: Oh and social security too

Excellent point, look at how overbudget medicare is.

You need to go back and re-read my post, for comprehension this time. Please do.

I comprehended what you said fine. It isn't my fault you are unwilling to acknowledge the facts about the govt's inability to efficently run things within a set buget such as the Post Office, Amtrack, Social Security, and Medicare.

 

[Immanuel]

If you want a system like they have in Socialist countrys, its not gonna happen. Too many freeloaders will bankrupt any health care program.

If it gets so expensive that the ranks of the uninsured continue to swell it's going to bankrupt anyway.

Better to bankrupt the companies providing the service and to start again than to bankrupt the country.

Health care is a mess. Obamacare only made things worse.

Unfortunately, we can't depend on Congress to do the right thing and start from scratch. There are some good things in Obamacare, but as a whole the program makes things so much worse.

I suspect what will happen will be that Obamacare is over turned completely. Obama will win a second term and by the end of that term we will have an even worse mess than we have now and a Universal Health Care bill being signed on the last day of his holding office. Screwing us over royally on his way out.

Immie

 

[Dragon]

Showing that Medicare is popular doesn't show that it's workable. Medicare is already going bankrupt. You're hurting your own argument.

You need to go back and re-read my post, for comprehension this time. Please do.

Other countries have single-payer systems that work perfectly well. The problems in ours is that it only covers old people. If it covered everyone, it would have none of the problems it faces today. It would be able to control health-care costs through bargaining leverage, and the new people added to the program would be much cheaper to cover than the ones it covers now.

I said all of that already. You are bringing up points that have already been answered in the very material you are quoting. i would be embarrassed if I did that.

 

[Dragon]

I comprehended what you said fine.

No,. obviously you did not. Look at the last post of mine directly above.

 

[Intense]

I forgot. Who insured the colonists? Who were their healthcare providers?

They didn't have any and died young from preventable diseases, you know, the republican health plan.

They worked with what they had, they lived within their means. I know that concept is Alien to you, living off of other peoples money, Leech. It is your kind of thinking that puts everyone at risk.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Showing that Medicare is popular doesn't show that it's workable. Medicare is already going bankrupt. You're hurting your own argument.

You need to go back and re-read my post, for comprehension this time. Please do.

Other countries have single-payer systems that work perfectly well. The problems in ours is that it only covers old people. If it covered everyone, it would have none of the problems it faces today. It would be able to control health-care costs through bargaining leverage, and the new people added to the program would be much cheaper to cover than the ones it covers now.

I said all of that already. You are bringing up points that have already been answered in the very material you are quoting. i would be embarrassed if I did that.

Have you heard of this thing called "The European Debt Crisis"

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Why look at the Post Office or Amtrak, which are in totally other areas? Why not look at the single-payer system we already have: Medicare?

Poll: Medicare, Medicaid among most popular gov't services - News Breaks - Front Page - Chain Drug Review :: Reporter for the Chain Drug Store Industry

Don’t mess with medicare, poll | Strange Bedfellows — Politics News - seattlepi.com

Wonkbook: 84 percent oppose Ryan’s Medicare plan - The Washington Post

Poll: Most Americans say Medicare is worth the cost - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

Seems to me that the U.S. government, like other governments of other advanced nations, is perfectly capable of running a single-payer health-care system that people are very happy with. Since Medicare would work much better if it were expanded to cover everyone (it would then have the leverage to keep the cost of medical care down), there's every reason to believe it would be much MORE popular even than it is now.

It wouldn't even cost that much more, and might actually cost less. Medicare is already covering the most at-risk population, the ones most expensive to cover (old people), and since it would be better positioned to control medical care inflation if expanded to cover everyone, while at the same time the rest of the population would be much less expensive (per person) to cover than people over 65, the total cost of the program might actually go DOWN.

It's the sensible thing to do.

Excellent point, look at how overbudget medicare is. We have to borrow money from china just to pay for it already.

Thanks for giving me a 3rd piece of ammunition for that specific argument!

EDIT: Oh and social security too

Excellent point, look at how overbudget medicare is.

You need to go back and re-read my post, for comprehension this time. Please do.

I comprehended what you said fine. It isn't my fault you are unwilling to acknowledge the facts about the govt's inability to efficently run things within a set buget such as the Post Office, Amtrack, Social Security, and Medicare.

Showing that Medicare is popular doesn't show that it's workable. Medicare is already going bankrupt. You're hurting your own argument.

You need to go back and re-read my post, for comprehension this time. Please do.

Other countries have single-payer systems that work perfectly well. The problems in ours is that it only covers old people. If it covered everyone, it would have none of the problems it faces today. It would be able to control health-care costs through bargaining leverage, and the new people added to the program would be much cheaper to cover than the ones it covers now.

I said all of that already. You are bringing up points that have already been answered in the very material you are quoting. i would be embarrassed if I did that.

Showing that Medicare is popular doesn't show that it's workable. Medicare is already going bankrupt. You're hurting your own argument.

You need to go back and re-read my post, for comprehension this time. Please do.

Other countries have single-payer systems that work perfectly well. The problems in ours is that it only covers old people. If it covered everyone, it would have none of the problems it faces today. It would be able to control health-care costs through bargaining leverage, and the new people added to the program would be much cheaper to cover than the ones it covers now.

I said all of that already. You are bringing up points that have already been answered in the very material you are quoting. i would be embarrassed if I did that.

Have you heard of this thing called "The European Debt Crisis"

It is very telling that you continue to remove the context of our discussion when quoting me. Its as if you know you lost the argument but are being desperate trying to make something stick.

 

[Intense]

Showing that Medicare is popular doesn't show that it's workable. Medicare is already going bankrupt. You're hurting your own argument.

You need to go back and re-read my post, for comprehension this time. Please do.

Other countries have single-payer systems that work perfectly well. The problems in ours is that it only covers old people. If it covered everyone, it would have none of the problems it faces today. It would be able to control health-care costs through bargaining leverage, and the new people added to the program would be much cheaper to cover than the ones it covers now.

I said all of that already. You are bringing up points that have already been answered in the very material you are quoting. i would be embarrassed if I did that.

Name Another Country that Champions Individual Liberty, Unalienable Rights?

 

[Dragon]

Have you heard of this thing called "The European Debt Crisis"

Only in right-wing propaganda outlets, even if that had any bearing on the subject under discussion, which it doesn't.

European and other single-payer health-care programs are doing fine and are nowhere near bankruptcy.

 

[Dragon]

Name Another Country that Champions Individual Liberty, Unalienable Rights?

All advanced countries today do, whether or not they use those specific words. There is nothing unique in that about America, and hasn't been for a very long time now.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Why look at the Post Office or Amtrak, which are in totally other areas? Why not look at the single-payer system we already have: Medicare?

Poll: Medicare, Medicaid among most popular gov't services - News Breaks - Front Page - Chain Drug Review :: Reporter for the Chain Drug Store Industry

Don’t mess with medicare, poll | Strange Bedfellows — Politics News - seattlepi.com

Wonkbook: 84 percent oppose Ryan’s Medicare plan - The Washington Post

Poll: Most Americans say Medicare is worth the cost - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

Seems to me that the U.S. government, like other governments of other advanced nations, is perfectly capable of running a single-payer health-care system that people are very happy with. Since Medicare would work much better if it were expanded to cover everyone (it would then have the leverage to keep the cost of medical care down), there's every reason to believe it would be much MORE popular even than it is now.

It wouldn't even cost that much more, and might actually cost less. Medicare is already covering the most at-risk population, the ones most expensive to cover (old people), and since it would be better positioned to control medical care inflation if expanded to cover everyone, while at the same time the rest of the population would be much less expensive (per person) to cover than people over 65, the total cost of the program might actually go DOWN.

It's the sensible thing to do.

Excellent point, look at how overbudget medicare is. We have to borrow money from china just to pay for it already.

Thanks for giving me a 3rd piece of ammunition for that specific argument!

EDIT: Oh and social security too

No kidding...

I'd like someone to tell me exactly which government agency is run as an efficient and well-oiled machine...

Parks and recreation.

oh, wait. they just started a forest fire.

Transportation

just kidding. the roads suck

I was in the Navy, so I know that aint it.



THE EPA Those soul sucking tyrants can fine an American out of their home and land even AFTER they have lost in court.

 

[Intense]

March 30 (Bloomberg) -- European governments moved to bolster their rescue funds, seeking to shield Spain and Italy from the fallout of the debt crisis without alienating bailout- weary voters in wealthy countries.

Finance ministers neared an agreement to run the temporary and permanent funds in parallel until mid-2013, potentially raising the upper limit on emergency lending to 940 billion euros ($1.3 trillion). Amounts immediately available would range between 340 billion euros and 640 billion euros.

Read more: Europe Moves to Boost Firewall to Shield Spain From Debt Crisis

 

[Dragon]

It is very telling that you continue to remove the context of our discussion when quoting me. Its as if you know you lost the argument but are being desperate trying to make something stick.

It's not "telling" at all, and you are simply making excuses. I always simplify quoted posts to the part that I intend to reply to, and I have no intention of changing that practice. If it bothers you, put me on ignore.

 

[Intense]

Name Another Country that Champions Individual Liberty, Unalienable Rights?

All advanced countries today do, whether or not they use those specific words. There is nothing unique in that about America, and hasn't been for a very long time now.

Except for the Statist Progressive Attack on Individual Liberty, you are so Right. Nice try Sparky.

 

[Intense]

It is very telling that you continue to remove the context of our discussion when quoting me. Its as if you know you lost the argument but are being desperate trying to make something stick.

It's not "telling" at all, and you are simply making excuses. I always simplify quoted posts to the part that I intend to reply to, and I have no intention of changing that practice. If it bothers you, put me on ignore.

If You alter the meaning of a Quote, it is more than poor form. It is against the Rules.

 

[Dragon]

Except for the Statist Progressive Attack on Individual Liberty, you are so Right.

Since there is no such thing -- it's a radical right-wing turnip ghost -- that means I am right, period.

 

[Immanuel]

Monopolies are bad for consumers. Single payer would be a giant monopoly with no competition to ensure quality and value.

You have theory. I have reality. Most of the advanced world has a single-payer system, and their health-care consumers are far better off than Americans. When theory contradicts reality, it's always the theory that's wrong, not the reality.

A for-profit monopoly would be bad for consumers, by the way. But we can't treat health care as a free market, because it isn't one and never can be one. You can only have a free market when consumers are free not to buy -- and I don't mean not to buy from any one provider, I mean not to buy from ANY provider whatsoever -- and when merchants are free not to sell.

There's the flaw in your theory, and the reason why it does not comport with reality.

I hear this shit all the time.

Know what, we live in America because it is frigging better than the entire rest of the "advanced" world combined!

If I wanted to live in a socialistic country, I'd move to Canada or France or any of the other countries that have sold their freedoms so that the government can spoon feed citizens.

Immie