Can Any Rightwinger Give Me A Solid Argument Why Private Industry Instead Of Government Should Run..

[Billy000]

You people know nothing about economics. You just listen to what republicans tell you. You people believe in trickle down economics which is one of the biggest political lies of all time.

I dont know who "you people" is. I guess its people who are well informed. That would cut you out. You dont have a ******* clue and get pwned so bad in your own threads you bail.

"Pwned" by who exactly? I've countered every point that was more than 2-3 sentences

That's an outright lie.

I gave you very solid arguments to your premise early on in this thread....and the only responses you would offer were

1) That's not true
2) That's not applicable
3) That's apples to oranges

But you never backed up your refutes.

So now you are not only closed minded....but you are a liar as well

Christ all you did was give anecdotal cases that were barely relevant to the conversation. You can't say shit like "well the ObamaCare website didn't work" and expect me to believe gov can't run our healthcare system. That's idiotic. You can't expect me to argue that.

Why not?

If they can't even get their website working in a reasonable time what makes them good at anything else?

Yes it does many things especially since different people run different programs ass clown.

 

[Redfish]

Jesus Christ. This whole thread is filled with evidence.

The website cost 600 million dollars. ALREADY costs went up with that alone. It could have been developed for 1/10 of that. 60 million dollars would develop a dam good web site.

Enough said.

Cant debate with a closed minded child like yourself.

Again you can't take an anecdotal case and apply it to a broad conclusion about the nature of government. That is fallacy.

Add up enough examples and you get evidence.
But there are no examples of government doing something efficiently. You have yet to post one.

Not anyone especially you have "added up examples". And once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

That claim has be disproven many times. You, my ignorant little friend are the idiot, you have been duped by the lib controlled media. Have you ever heard of ST Judes, Mayo, Cleveland clinic, Ochsner clinic, MD Anderson, and many others? People with cancer and other terrible diseases have been treated free for decades. Those of us who pay cover the costs of those who cannot. Exactly the theory behind obozocare, but without the huge expensive govt beaurocracy.

 

[The Rabbi]

Jesus Christ. This whole thread is filled with evidence.

The website cost 600 million dollars. ALREADY costs went up with that alone. It could have been developed for 1/10 of that. 60 million dollars would develop a dam good web site.

Enough said.

Cant debate with a closed minded child like yourself.

Again you can't take an anecdotal case and apply it to a broad conclusion about the nature of government. That is fallacy.

Add up enough examples and you get evidence.
But there are no examples of government doing something efficiently. You have yet to post one.

Not anyone especially you have "added up examples". And once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

Evidence for that? There isnt any. Tens of millions of people get cancer treatment every day in this country.
Another Billy fail

 

[Billy000]

Again you can't take an anecdotal case and apply it to a broad conclusion about the nature of government. That is fallacy.

Add up enough examples and you get evidence.
But there are no examples of government doing something efficiently. You have yet to post one.

Not anyone especially you have "added up examples". And once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

Evidence for that? There isnt any. Tens of millions of people get cancer treatment every day in this country.
Another Billy fail

Are you aware of how much of a moron you really are?

 

[Billy000]

Again you can't take an anecdotal case and apply it to a broad conclusion about the nature of government. That is fallacy.

Add up enough examples and you get evidence.
But there are no examples of government doing something efficiently. You have yet to post one.

Not anyone especially you have "added up examples". And once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

That claim has be disproven many times. You, my ignorant little friend are the idiot, you have been duped by the lib controlled media. Have you ever heard of ST Judes, Mayo, Cleveland clinic, Ochsner clinic, MD Anderson, and many others? People with cancer and other terrible diseases have been treated free for decades. Those of us who pay cover the costs of those who cannot. Exactly the theory behind obozocare, but without the huge expensive govt beaurocracy.

Oh really? Those companies are capable of treating all of the poor Americans in this country? What are they waiting for? Free cancer treatment for some doesn't mean it is free treatment for all.

 

[The Rabbi]

Add up enough examples and you get evidence.
But there are no examples of government doing something efficiently. You have yet to post one.

Not anyone especially you have "added up examples". And once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

Evidence for that? There isnt any. Tens of millions of people get cancer treatment every day in this country.
Another Billy fail

Are you aware of how much of a moron you really are?

Enough of a moron to debate someone with obviously no clue like you.

 

[Mathbud1]

Jesus Christ. This whole thread is filled with evidence.

The website cost 600 million dollars. ALREADY costs went up with that alone. It could have been developed for 1/10 of that. 60 million dollars would develop a dam good web site.

Enough said.

Cant debate with a closed minded child like yourself.

Again you can't take an anecdotal case and apply it to a broad conclusion about the nature of government. That is fallacy.

Add up enough examples and you get evidence.
But there are no examples of government doing something efficiently. You have yet to post one.

Not anyone especially you have "added up examples". And once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

According to the National Cancer Institute there aren't tens of millions of people who have cancer in the U.S.

In 2011, there were an estimated 13,397,159 people living with all cancer sites in the United States.

Cancer of All Sites - SEER Stat Fact Sheets

That is one ten of millions. Not tens.

Futhermore, the National Cancer Institute reports:

• The rate of cancer incidence has declined since 1998.
• Length of cancer survival has increased for all cancers combined. For all sites, the proportion of people surviving five years from diagnosis in 2003 (most recent year with five-year follow up) was 66.7 percent. Improvement in survival must continue to meet the Healthy People 2020 objective for five year survival of 72.8 percent.

Cancer Trends Progress Report - Report Highlights

Finally, The U.S. has the highest 5-year survival rate for all cancer sites of all the countries measured in this report. This is typical of all similar reports that I have seen.
http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/co...rveilance/documents/document/acspc-027766.pdf - page 8

 

[Billy000]

Again you can't take an anecdotal case and apply it to a broad conclusion about the nature of government. That is fallacy.

Add up enough examples and you get evidence.
But there are no examples of government doing something efficiently. You have yet to post one.

Not anyone especially you have "added up examples". And once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

According to the National Cancer Institute there aren't tens of millions of people who have cancer in the U.S.

In 2011, there were an estimated 13,397,159 people living with all cancer sites in the United States.

Cancer of All Sites - SEER Stat Fact Sheets

That is one ten of millions. Not tens.

Futhermore, the National Cancer Institute reports:

• The rate of cancer incidence has declined since 1998.
• Length of cancer survival has increased for all cancers combined. For all sites, the proportion of people surviving five years from diagnosis in 2003 (most recent year with five-year follow up) was 66.7 percent. Improvement in survival must continue to meet the Healthy People 2020 objective for five year survival of 72.8 percent.

Cancer Trends Progress Report - Report Highlights

Finally, The U.S. has the highest 5-year survival rate for all cancer sites of all the countries measured in this report. This is typical of all similar reports that I have seen.
http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/co...rveilance/documents/document/acspc-027766.pdf - page 8

Okay try keep up will you? I never said 10s of millions of Americans have cancer. I said that 10s of millions of people cannot AFFORD cancer treatment.

And again the good quality of cancer treatment does not mean poor people can afford it.

 

[kaz]

once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

No one is arguing for private industry to "run our healthcare system." In free markets, we have the choice to fire companies that don't serve our needs. In your socialist system, we don't. The idea of making your own choices is just not part of your world.

 

[kaz]

Okay try keep up will you? I never said 10s of millions of Americans have cancer. I said that 10s of millions of people cannot AFFORD cancer treatment.

And again the good quality of cancer treatment does not mean poor people can afford it.

And if you live in Canada, you are more likely to die of cancer or heart disease than in America, and that's with Canadians coming to America for treatment they can't get in Canada until after they are dead. Europeans also flock to the US for treatment, particularly Florida. If we suck so much, why are the people with your People's Health Care model coming here exactly?

 

[Redfish]

Add up enough examples and you get evidence.
But there are no examples of government doing something efficiently. You have yet to post one.

Not anyone especially you have "added up examples". And once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

According to the National Cancer Institute there aren't tens of millions of people who have cancer in the U.S.

In 2011, there were an estimated 13,397,159 people living with all cancer sites in the United States.

Cancer of All Sites - SEER Stat Fact Sheets

That is one ten of millions. Not tens.

Futhermore, the National Cancer Institute reports:

• The rate of cancer incidence has declined since 1998.
• Length of cancer survival has increased for all cancers combined. For all sites, the proportion of people surviving five years from diagnosis in 2003 (most recent year with five-year follow up) was 66.7 percent. Improvement in survival must continue to meet the Healthy People 2020 objective for five year survival of 72.8 percent.

Cancer Trends Progress Report - Report Highlights

Finally, The U.S. has the highest 5-year survival rate for all cancer sites of all the countries measured in this report. This is typical of all similar reports that I have seen.
http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/co...rveilance/documents/document/acspc-027766.pdf - page 8

Okay try keep up will you? I never said 10s of millions of Americans have cancer. I said that 10s of millions of people cannot AFFORD cancer treatment.

And again the good quality of cancer treatment does not mean poor people can afford it.

your statement is not true. there are not tens of millions who are denied cancer treatment because they can't afford it. No one was denied treatment, before or after ACA. Not having insurance does not mean you don't receive treatment.

you are the victim of a left wing lie.

 

[kaz]

Oh really? Those companies are capable of treating all of the poor Americans in this country? What are they waiting for? Free cancer treatment for some doesn't mean it is free treatment for all.

Better to be in Canada and get free treatment after you are dead?

 

[Billy000]

Not anyone especially you have "added up examples". And once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

According to the National Cancer Institute there aren't tens of millions of people who have cancer in the U.S.

In 2011, there were an estimated 13,397,159 people living with all cancer sites in the United States.

Cancer of All Sites - SEER Stat Fact Sheets

That is one ten of millions. Not tens.

Futhermore, the National Cancer Institute reports:

• The rate of cancer incidence has declined since 1998.
• Length of cancer survival has increased for all cancers combined. For all sites, the proportion of people surviving five years from diagnosis in 2003 (most recent year with five-year follow up) was 66.7 percent. Improvement in survival must continue to meet the Healthy People 2020 objective for five year survival of 72.8 percent.

Cancer Trends Progress Report - Report Highlights

Finally, The U.S. has the highest 5-year survival rate for all cancer sites of all the countries measured in this report. This is typical of all similar reports that I have seen.
http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/co...rveilance/documents/document/acspc-027766.pdf - page 8

Okay try keep up will you? I never said 10s of millions of Americans have cancer. I said that 10s of millions of people cannot AFFORD cancer treatment.

And again the good quality of cancer treatment does not mean poor people can afford it.

your statement is not true. there are not tens of millions who are denied cancer treatment because they can't afford it. No one was denied treatment, before or after ACA. Not having insurance does not mean you don't receive treatment.

you are the victim of a left wing lie.

So you're saying that anyone who has attempted to get cancer treatment was allowed it? That is complete bullshit and you know it.

 

[Billy000]

Okay try keep up will you? I never said 10s of millions of Americans have cancer. I said that 10s of millions of people cannot AFFORD cancer treatment.

And again the good quality of cancer treatment does not mean poor people can afford it.

And if you live in Canada, you are more likely to die of cancer or heart disease than in America, and that's with Canadians coming to America for treatment they can't get in Canada until after they are dead. Europeans also flock to the US for treatment, particularly Florida. If we suck so much, why are the people with your People's Health Care model coming here exactly?

Rich people come here because they can afford our top quality treatment.

 

[Mathbud1]

Add up enough examples and you get evidence.
But there are no examples of government doing something efficiently. You have yet to post one.

Not anyone especially you have "added up examples". And once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

According to the National Cancer Institute there aren't tens of millions of people who have cancer in the U.S.

In 2011, there were an estimated 13,397,159 people living with all cancer sites in the United States.

Cancer of All Sites - SEER Stat Fact Sheets

That is one ten of millions. Not tens.

Futhermore, the National Cancer Institute reports:

• The rate of cancer incidence has declined since 1998.
• Length of cancer survival has increased for all cancers combined. For all sites, the proportion of people surviving five years from diagnosis in 2003 (most recent year with five-year follow up) was 66.7 percent. Improvement in survival must continue to meet the Healthy People 2020 objective for five year survival of 72.8 percent.

Cancer Trends Progress Report - Report Highlights

Finally, The U.S. has the highest 5-year survival rate for all cancer sites of all the countries measured in this report. This is typical of all similar reports that I have seen.
http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/co...rveilance/documents/document/acspc-027766.pdf - page 8

Okay try keep up will you? I never said 10s of millions of Americans have cancer. I said that 10s of millions of people cannot AFFORD cancer treatment.

And again the good quality of cancer treatment does not mean poor people can afford it.

If they never need treatment, they don't need to be able to afford treatment. Being able to afford treatment doesn't matter if the treatment is not effective.

There are not tens of millions of Americans who cannot afford cancer treatment. That implies that there are tens of millions who have cancer and are unable to afford the treatment that they need. That is false. If you are instead saying that there are tens of millions of Americans who could not afford cancer treatment if they did need it, how do you know that they could not afford it? What is your proof of that?

 

[kaz]

Okay try keep up will you? I never said 10s of millions of Americans have cancer. I said that 10s of millions of people cannot AFFORD cancer treatment.

And again the good quality of cancer treatment does not mean poor people can afford it.

And if you live in Canada, you are more likely to die of cancer or heart disease than in America, and that's with Canadians coming to America for treatment they can't get in Canada until after they are dead. Europeans also flock to the US for treatment, particularly Florida. If we suck so much, why are the people with your People's Health Care model coming here exactly?

Rich people come here because they can afford our top quality treatment.

True, now what about addressing my point?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Add up enough examples and you get evidence.
But there are no examples of government doing something efficiently. You have yet to post one.

Not anyone especially you have "added up examples". And once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

According to the National Cancer Institute there aren't tens of millions of people who have cancer in the U.S.

In 2011, there were an estimated 13,397,159 people living with all cancer sites in the United States.

Cancer of All Sites - SEER Stat Fact Sheets

That is one ten of millions. Not tens.

Futhermore, the National Cancer Institute reports:

• The rate of cancer incidence has declined since 1998.
• Length of cancer survival has increased for all cancers combined. For all sites, the proportion of people surviving five years from diagnosis in 2003 (most recent year with five-year follow up) was 66.7 percent. Improvement in survival must continue to meet the Healthy People 2020 objective for five year survival of 72.8 percent.

Cancer Trends Progress Report - Report Highlights

Finally, The U.S. has the highest 5-year survival rate for all cancer sites of all the countries measured in this report. This is typical of all similar reports that I have seen.
http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/co...rveilance/documents/document/acspc-027766.pdf - page 8

Okay try keep up will you? I never said 10s of millions of Americans have cancer. I said that 10s of millions of people cannot AFFORD cancer treatment.

And again the good quality of cancer treatment does not mean poor people can afford it.

You don't seem to understand that businesses create "good treatments" precisely BECAUSE some people can afford it.

It's not any different than say the beer industry. You go into your liquor store and look at the beer and you will see Pabst Blue Ribbon on one end, and Heineken , or Red Stripe or whatever on the other.

Should beer companies say "well gentleman not everyone can afford the Heinieken, but that's not fair, so let's stop making PBR and just give Heineken free of charge to those who can't afford it?"

And THAT is why the government shouldn't be in charge of shit.

 

[Billy000]

Not anyone especially you have "added up examples". And once again you are missing the point. None of you have proven that a private institution can run our healthcare system better. The fact that gov is not perfect means dick if private industry isn't perfect either.

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

According to the National Cancer Institute there aren't tens of millions of people who have cancer in the U.S.

In 2011, there were an estimated 13,397,159 people living with all cancer sites in the United States.

Cancer of All Sites - SEER Stat Fact Sheets

That is one ten of millions. Not tens.

Futhermore, the National Cancer Institute reports:

• The rate of cancer incidence has declined since 1998.
• Length of cancer survival has increased for all cancers combined. For all sites, the proportion of people surviving five years from diagnosis in 2003 (most recent year with five-year follow up) was 66.7 percent. Improvement in survival must continue to meet the Healthy People 2020 objective for five year survival of 72.8 percent.

Cancer Trends Progress Report - Report Highlights

Finally, The U.S. has the highest 5-year survival rate for all cancer sites of all the countries measured in this report. This is typical of all similar reports that I have seen.
http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/co...rveilance/documents/document/acspc-027766.pdf - page 8

Okay try keep up will you? I never said 10s of millions of Americans have cancer. I said that 10s of millions of people cannot AFFORD cancer treatment.

And again the good quality of cancer treatment does not mean poor people can afford it.

"If they never need treatment, they don't need to be able to afford treatment. Being able to afford treatment doesn't matter if the treatment is not effective.

There are not tens of millions of Americans who cannot afford cancer treatment. That implies that there are tens of millions who have cancer and are unable to afford the treatment that they need. That is false. If you are instead saying that there are tens of millions of Americans who could not afford cancer treatment if they did need it, how do you know that they could not afford it? What is your proof of that?

High cost of care becomes cancer s growing burden USATODAY.com

"A recent American Cancer Society survey found that one-quarter of U.S. cancer patients put off getting a test or treatment because of cost, the group's chief medical officer, Dr. Otis Brawley, writes in his new book "How We Do Harm," which discusses costs and argues for more rational use of health care. One out of 5 survey respondents over 65 said they had used all or much of their savings on cancer care.

The burden hits hard on the middle class — people too well off for programs that cover the poor but unable to afford what cancer care often costs.

Dr. Amy Abernethy, director of the cancer care research program at Duke University, did a study of 250 such patients from around the country. Most were women with breast cancer, including Tyree. All but one had insurance, and two-thirds were covered by Medicare. The vast majority also had prescription drug coverage.

Their out-of-pocket expenses averaged $712 a month for doctor visits, medicines, lost wages and travel to appointments. To pay for cancer drugs, half spent less on food and clothes, and 43 percent borrowed money or used credit. Also, 26 percent did not fill a prescription, 22 percent filled part of one and 20 percent took less than prescribed."

Look at those numbers. You think poor people can afford all of that? Sure not all poor people have cancer but all poor people have the potential to get it. Is that fair?

 

[Listening]

Is it that you can't read, don't want to read or have poor reading comprehension skills?

I did not say "the Obama care web site didn't work"

What I said was that the ACA website (government contracted) that is designed to cater to 300 million people in one country cost 600 million dollars while the Amazon website (privately contracted) that is designed to cater to billions of people over 7 continents cost a fraction of that.

That is a clear example of how the US government is by no means cost efficient.

I then asked you to look into the history of the US government and the iron business....when back in the 30's they decided it would be more cost effective to produce its own iron for military vehicles than to purchase it from private industry. When all was said and done, they found it cost over twice as much to produce it on their own than to purchase it from private industry.

Again, a clear example of how government is not nearly as cost efficient as private industry.

I then pointed out how the USPS overnight delivery has been operating at a loss since its inception while Fed Ex and UPS turn a profit on a yearly basis.

And your response to those examples were

1) Not true
2) Apples to oranges
3) not applicable...

and now...

4) Anecdotal.

But still wont back it up.

In other words....you don't want us to answer your original question of this thread...for when we do you simply cast it off as a non answer.

Except that there are plenty of examples of government running efficiently. Our military, CIA, and FBI have all fun great since their inception. Perfectly? No. Nothing runs perfectly.

it depends on what you refer to as efficiently.

If cost is not an issue, one can make anything run efficiently.

Our military is efficient as it pertains to its ability as a military......the personnel are top notch, the training is matched by none and the technology is state of the art.

But the cost to run it? You can buy ammo privately for half of what the military spends.

There is truth to the 750 dollar latrine seat.

The whole point is......healthcare is going to wind up costing the people a lot more with government intervention. When government intervenes, costs always go up.

Bottom line.......you asked a question....we answered.

You did not like the answers and you could not refute them.

So you are now changing the subject.

Where is your evidence that costs would "go way up"? Just because something sounds like it could be true doesn't mean it actually is true.

He just gave it to you. There is no certainty in anything. But there is a good reason to believe that the unchecked bloated systems of the U.S. Federal government are an indication of the way health care would go.

Beyond that, it simply does not make sense to run one system for 310,000,000 people.

You dickweeds constantly point at European systems....like Denmark. How big is Denmark ? How big is Florida ?

But no.....you have to have your super system that is the equivalent of a big cow paddy.

In order to make the argument that costs would go up would be you would provide relevant data.There really isn't a way to predict such a thing because we do not have relevant information to compare it to. You people just rely on this baseless propaganda that gov is inherently useless.

You don't get a pass when in comes to the default. There is no innocent until proven guilty when it comes to government administered programs.

All you need do is look at our public schools vs. private schools. You don't get to discount that.

 

[Listening]

private industry has run it just fine for over 200 years. there was no healthcare crisis in the USA. no one was denied medical treatment before obozocare.

ACA was not about fixing healthcare. it was a socialist takeover of 1/5 or our economy.

You're an idiot. 10s of millions of people can't afford basic cancer treatment and it doesn't stop there.

According to the National Cancer Institute there aren't tens of millions of people who have cancer in the U.S.

In 2011, there were an estimated 13,397,159 people living with all cancer sites in the United States.

Cancer of All Sites - SEER Stat Fact Sheets

That is one ten of millions. Not tens.

Futhermore, the National Cancer Institute reports:

• The rate of cancer incidence has declined since 1998.
• Length of cancer survival has increased for all cancers combined. For all sites, the proportion of people surviving five years from diagnosis in 2003 (most recent year with five-year follow up) was 66.7 percent. Improvement in survival must continue to meet the Healthy People 2020 objective for five year survival of 72.8 percent.

Cancer Trends Progress Report - Report Highlights

Finally, The U.S. has the highest 5-year survival rate for all cancer sites of all the countries measured in this report. This is typical of all similar reports that I have seen.
http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/co...rveilance/documents/document/acspc-027766.pdf - page 8

Okay try keep up will you? I never said 10s of millions of Americans have cancer. I said that 10s of millions of people cannot AFFORD cancer treatment.

And again the good quality of cancer treatment does not mean poor people can afford it.

"If they never need treatment, they don't need to be able to afford treatment. Being able to afford treatment doesn't matter if the treatment is not effective.

There are not tens of millions of Americans who cannot afford cancer treatment. That implies that there are tens of millions who have cancer and are unable to afford the treatment that they need. That is false. If you are instead saying that there are tens of millions of Americans who could not afford cancer treatment if they did need it, how do you know that they could not afford it? What is your proof of that?

High cost of care becomes cancer s growing burden USATODAY.com

"A recent American Cancer Society survey found that one-quarter of U.S. cancer patients put off getting a test or treatment because of cost, the group's chief medical officer, Dr. Otis Brawley, writes in his new book "How We Do Harm," which discusses costs and argues for more rational use of health care. One out of 5 survey respondents over 65 said they had used all or much of their savings on cancer care.

The burden hits hard on the middle class — people too well off for programs that cover the poor but unable to afford what cancer care often costs.

Dr. Amy Abernethy, director of the cancer care research program at Duke University, did a study of 250 such patients from around the country. Most were women with breast cancer, including Tyree. All but one had insurance, and two-thirds were covered by Medicare. The vast majority also had prescription drug coverage.

Their out-of-pocket expenses averaged $712 a month for doctor visits, medicines, lost wages and travel to appointments. To pay for cancer drugs, half spent less on food and clothes, and 43 percent borrowed money or used credit. Also, 26 percent did not fill a prescription, 22 percent filled part of one and 20 percent took less than prescribed."

Look at those numbers. You think poor people can afford all of that? Sure not all poor people have cancer but all poor people have the potential to get it. Is that fair?

So what ?

People have been making health care decisions based on cost since the beginning of time.

Are you suggesting we can provide all the health care that everyone wants all the time ?