Do we all agree yet that obamacare was always a single payer trojan horse?

[OldLady]

Been saying it since it happened. The one thing that you cannot do politically is take away something from millions of people that have been GIVEN something. We know obama counted on this. They knew it would be next to impossible to take the insurance away from millions of people who have it. We also know that it is impossible to be sustained. Both things counted on and Grubber admitted this.

You're conceding the genius of Obama?

Interesting.

genius?

Single payer has failed everywhere it's been tried

yeah it's "genius" to actually want that

It's not failing in Europe. We are the only industrialized, modern country in the world that DOESN'T have it. I'll bet even Russia has it. And we're too fuckin' backwards to provide lifesaving medical care to all our citizens because....we're pig headed baboons.

 

[OldLady]

That thing is such a stupid, horrific pig that I give the Dems the benefit of the doubt that they are not so dumb as to believe it would actually work.

So yeah, that would mean that Single Payer has been on their mind all along.

But the 2008 elections had long-term consequences. It gave the public something it didn't have before, and today's more pragmatic Republicans know that you just can't take something like that away. And that's why they're voting on Stupid, Horrific Pig 2.0 today. It's most likely too late to go back.
.

I agree the Dems knew exactly what would happen down the road once ObamaCare was instituted. It's my opinion we should stop struggling against the single payer universal coverage we will inevitably get, and just go for it. We deserve it. Then both sides of the aisle can start focusing on the real problem--why healthcare costs (not insurance) are so high.

Do you think we should go for it if you knew, if you were 100% sure that it would destroy the fabric of the nation and society as we know it forever?

I will not disagree with you that everyone "deserves" what ever they wish for, dream of, and most importantly, need. I will not disagree with you that everyone deserves the very best of care. But if you knew, that in the attempt to deliver that, all care will degrade and become less over time so that in the future, only the very rich and the elites will have care, would you still desire such a path forward?

Here is the important reality.

I learned at a very young age, the the study of economics is the study of a people's unlimited wants and needs, in a world of limited resources. Our job is to best decide how to distribute those resources.

How are the other successful countries of the world providing universal coverage and succeeding? Sure there are some problems, but nothing close to our "fail" rate to provide sensible healthcare to all our citizens without such fuss and bother.

 

[MisterBeale]

That thing is such a stupid, horrific pig that I give the Dems the benefit of the doubt that they are not so dumb as to believe it would actually work.

So yeah, that would mean that Single Payer has been on their mind all along.

But the 2008 elections had long-term consequences. It gave the public something it didn't have before, and today's more pragmatic Republicans know that you just can't take something like that away. And that's why they're voting on Stupid, Horrific Pig 2.0 today. It's most likely too late to go back.
.

I agree the Dems knew exactly what would happen down the road once ObamaCare was instituted. It's my opinion we should stop struggling against the single payer universal coverage we will inevitably get, and just go for it. We deserve it. Then both sides of the aisle can start focusing on the real problem--why healthcare costs (not insurance) are so high.

Do you think we should go for it if you knew, if you were 100% sure that it would destroy the fabric of the nation and society as we know it forever?

I will not disagree with you that everyone "deserves" what ever they wish for, dream of, and most importantly, need. I will not disagree with you that everyone deserves the very best of care. But if you knew, that in the attempt to deliver that, all care will degrade and become less over time so that in the future, only the very rich and the elites will have care, would you still desire such a path forward?

Here is the important reality.

I learned at a very young age, the the study of economics is the study of a people's unlimited wants and needs, in a world of limited resources. Our job is to best decide how to distribute those resources.

How are the other successful countries of the world providing universal coverage and succeeding? Sure there are some problems, but nothing close to our "fail" rate to provide sensible healthcare to all our citizens without such fuss and bother.

I will tell you, and show you in easy to explain charts and graphs to make it simple if you like.

Name me one nation you believe is doing it successfully. I won't even quibble the point on whether they are doing it successfully or not.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Q. Why is the PPACA not sustainable

A. Specifically, because ...

Anyone?

Because more and more insurers are finding it not worth pursuing, even the giants.

This is already leading to fewer and fewer choices for consumers.

Obviously.

Was this a trick question?
.

Not at all. Why are insurers not finding it worth pursuing? Too little profit, it hurts their bottom line?

The reality is we are faced with a lack of national priorities. Example, the cost for R&D of the F-35 and other weapons systems enrich the Military Industrial Complex but does little to protect the average citizen from attacks such as the one n London most recently. Heart disease and cancer are the greater threats to US citizens, are they not?

 

[OldLady]

That thing is such a stupid, horrific pig that I give the Dems the benefit of the doubt that they are not so dumb as to believe it would actually work.

So yeah, that would mean that Single Payer has been on their mind all along.

But the 2008 elections had long-term consequences. It gave the public something it didn't have before, and today's more pragmatic Republicans know that you just can't take something like that away. And that's why they're voting on Stupid, Horrific Pig 2.0 today. It's most likely too late to go back.
.

I agree the Dems knew exactly what would happen down the road once ObamaCare was instituted. It's my opinion we should stop struggling against the single payer universal coverage we will inevitably get, and just go for it. We deserve it. Then both sides of the aisle can start focusing on the real problem--why healthcare costs (not insurance) are so high.

I'd much rather see an expansion of the Medicare/Medicare Supplement/Medicare Advantage system to all, allowing for some dynamic free market competition and innovation.

But we agree, this is just untenable as it is. And I think we'd also agree that, at the heart of the problem, are national politicians.
.

At the heart of the problem are healthcare costs, and that can only be solved by national politicians with the will to make big corporations scream. We'll see if they ever reach the point.

 

[Mac1958]

Why are insurers not finding it worth pursuing? Too little profit, it hurts their bottom line?

Yes, that's exactly the reason. Corporations exist for one (1) reason, and that is to maximize shareholder value.

Surely the Democrats knew this, yet they made the system unattractive to, and untenable for, health insurers.

And that's why I suspect their plan all along may have been Single Payer. Terribly intellectually dishonest.
.

 

[Mac1958]

That thing is such a stupid, horrific pig that I give the Dems the benefit of the doubt that they are not so dumb as to believe it would actually work.

So yeah, that would mean that Single Payer has been on their mind all along.

But the 2008 elections had long-term consequences. It gave the public something it didn't have before, and today's more pragmatic Republicans know that you just can't take something like that away. And that's why they're voting on Stupid, Horrific Pig 2.0 today. It's most likely too late to go back.
.

I agree the Dems knew exactly what would happen down the road once ObamaCare was instituted. It's my opinion we should stop struggling against the single payer universal coverage we will inevitably get, and just go for it. We deserve it. Then both sides of the aisle can start focusing on the real problem--why healthcare costs (not insurance) are so high.

I'd much rather see an expansion of the Medicare/Medicare Supplement/Medicare Advantage system to all, allowing for some dynamic free market competition and innovation.

But we agree, this is just untenable as it is. And I think we'd also agree that, at the heart of the problem, are national politicians.
.

At the heart of the problem are healthcare costs, and that can only be solved by national politicians with the will to make big corporations scream. We'll see if they ever reach the point.

The Medicare Advantage and Medicare Supplement systems work fine for consumers and insurers alike. That's why we should all be on them.
.

 

[OldLady]

That thing is such a stupid, horrific pig that I give the Dems the benefit of the doubt that they are not so dumb as to believe it would actually work.

So yeah, that would mean that Single Payer has been on their mind all along.

But the 2008 elections had long-term consequences. It gave the public something it didn't have before, and today's more pragmatic Republicans know that you just can't take something like that away. And that's why they're voting on Stupid, Horrific Pig 2.0 today. It's most likely too late to go back.
.

I agree the Dems knew exactly what would happen down the road once ObamaCare was instituted. It's my opinion we should stop struggling against the single payer universal coverage we will inevitably get, and just go for it. We deserve it. Then both sides of the aisle can start focusing on the real problem--why healthcare costs (not insurance) are so high.

Do you think we should go for it if you knew, if you were 100% sure that it would destroy the fabric of the nation and society as we know it forever?

I will not disagree with you that everyone "deserves" what ever they wish for, dream of, and most importantly, need. I will not disagree with you that everyone deserves the very best of care. But if you knew, that in the attempt to deliver that, all care will degrade and become less over time so that in the future, only the very rich and the elites will have care, would you still desire such a path forward?

Here is the important reality.

I learned at a very young age, the the study of economics is the study of a people's unlimited wants and needs, in a world of limited resources. Our job is to best decide how to distribute those resources.

How are the other successful countries of the world providing universal coverage and succeeding? Sure there are some problems, but nothing close to our "fail" rate to provide sensible healthcare to all our citizens without such fuss and bother.

I will tell you, and show you in easy to explain charts and graphs to make it simple if you like.

Name me one nation you believe is doing it successfully. I won't even quibble the point on whether they are doing it successfully or not.

All the countries in Europe? Let's pull one out of the hat: France.

 

[BoSoxGal]

Why are insurers not finding it worth pursuing? Too little profit, it hurts their bottom line?

Yes, that's exactly the reason. Corporations exist for one (1) reason, and that is to maximize shareholder value.

Surely the Democrats knew this, yet they made the system unattractive to, and untenable for, health insurers.

And that's why I suspect their plan all along may have been Single Payer. Terribly intellectually dishonest.
.

I think the majority of Democrats have made no secret of their support for a public option and/or for single payer. Perhaps you weren't paying attention? ACA was a compromise that left nobody ecstatic.

 

[Mac1958]

Why are insurers not finding it worth pursuing? Too little profit, it hurts their bottom line?

Yes, that's exactly the reason. Corporations exist for one (1) reason, and that is to maximize shareholder value.

Surely the Democrats knew this, yet they made the system unattractive to, and untenable for, health insurers.

And that's why I suspect their plan all along may have been Single Payer. Terribly intellectually dishonest.
.

I think the majority of Democrats have made no secret of their support for a public option and/or for single payer. Perhaps you weren't paying attention? ACA was a compromise that left nobody ecstatic.

Yes, I was paying attention. And this is what we got. If you want to defend it, great. I'm under no such partisan obligation.
.

 

[BoSoxGal]

I'm under no partisan obligations either - I'm a progressive registered Independent.

I follow politics pretty closely, by actually reading and listening to what the elected officials say and not the spin on cable news. I've heard many Democrats advocate for public option and/or single payer. So no intellectual dishonesty; ACA was a compromise after a 9 month process.

 

[Mac1958]

I'm under no partisan obligations either - I'm a progressive registered Independent.

I follow politics pretty closely, by actually reading and listening to what the elected officials say and not the spin on cable news. I've heard many Democrats advocate for public option and/or single payer. So no intellectual dishonesty; ACA was a compromise after a 9 month process.

The Dems own the ACA. If it passes, the GOP owns their pig.

Since you follow politics closely, you know that.
.

 

[BoSoxGal]

Yes the Democrats own the ACA - no problem. They're also very willing to fix it by expanding it further via public option. Many of them are also open to single payer.

Not sure what you're getting at but I think you're not making a valid point. So we'll agree to disagree.

 

[AntonToo]

Been saying it since it happened. The one thing that you cannot do politically is take away something from millions of people that have been GIVEN something. We know obama counted on this. They knew it would be next to impossible to take the insurance away from millions of people who have it. We also know that it is impossible to be sustained. Both things counted on and Grubber admitted this.

So why didn't you dummy Republicans thwart Obama's devious plan by working with quite willing Democrats to fix Obamacare into a good law?

 

[Mac1958]

Yes the Democrats own the ACA - no problem. They're also very willing to fix it by expanding it further via public option. Many of them are also open to single payer. Not sure what you're getting at but I think you're not making a valid point. So we'll agree to disagree.

Please use the REPLY function.

My points are (a) the Democrats must have known that the ACA would end up crashing and were probably hoping to ultimately transition to Single Payer, and (b) that neither party has anything to crow about when it comes to the crap they have foisted on us.
.

 

[BoSoxGal]

The CBO's other bombshell: the Affordable Care Act isn't imploding

Yes the Democrats own the ACA - no problem. They're also very willing to fix it by expanding it further via public option. Many of them are also open to single payer. Not sure what you're getting at but I think you're not making a valid point. So we'll agree to disagree.

Please use the REPLY function.

My points are (a) the Democrats must have known that the ACA would end up crashing and were probably hoping to ultimately transition to Single Payer, and (b) that neither party has anything to crow about when it comes to the crap they have foisted on us.
.

ACA isn't crashing. You're drinking the koolaid.

 

[Mac1958]

Yes the Democrats own the ACA - no problem. They're also very willing to fix it by expanding it further via public option. Many of them are also open to single payer. Not sure what you're getting at but I think you're not making a valid point. So we'll agree to disagree.

Please use the REPLY function.

My points are (a) the Democrats must have known that the ACA would end up crashing and were probably hoping to ultimately transition to Single Payer, and (b) that neither party has anything to crow about when it comes to the crap they have foisted on us.
.

ACA isn't crashing. You're drinking the koolaid.

You don't know my politics, you don't know what I'd like to see (it's in post 21), and YOU are drinking the Kool Aid.

Try this crap with someone at your more simplistic level.
.

 

[BoSoxGal]

Yes the Democrats own the ACA - no problem. They're also very willing to fix it by expanding it further via public option. Many of them are also open to single payer. Not sure what you're getting at but I think you're not making a valid point. So we'll agree to disagree.

Please use the REPLY function.

My points are (a) the Democrats must have known that the ACA would end up crashing and were probably hoping to ultimately transition to Single Payer, and (b) that neither party has anything to crow about when it comes to the crap they have foisted on us.
.

ACA isn't crashing. You're drinking the koolaid.

You don't know my politics, you don't know what I'd like to see (it's in post 21), and YOU are drinking the Kool Aid.

Try this crap with someone at your more simplistic level.
.

Yeah, I'm simplistic. With my law degree from Georgetown and experience actually working on Capitol Hill.

Bwahahaha!

Try reading the CBO report. Try reading what healthcare economists say about ACA. Try reading the positions of the AMA, AARP, and numerous other national organizations that support ACA.

Talk about simplistic - you're a poster boy.

 

[Mac1958]

Yes the Democrats own the ACA - no problem. They're also very willing to fix it by expanding it further via public option. Many of them are also open to single payer. Not sure what you're getting at but I think you're not making a valid point. So we'll agree to disagree.

Please use the REPLY function.

My points are (a) the Democrats must have known that the ACA would end up crashing and were probably hoping to ultimately transition to Single Payer, and (b) that neither party has anything to crow about when it comes to the crap they have foisted on us.
.

ACA isn't crashing. You're drinking the koolaid.

You don't know my politics, you don't know what I'd like to see (it's in post 21), and YOU are drinking the Kool Aid.

Try this crap with someone at your more simplistic level.
.

Yeah, I'm simplistic. With my law degree from Georgetown and experience actually working on Capitol Hill.

Bwahahaha!

Enjoy your Kool Aid.
.

 

[MisterBeale]

That thing is such a stupid, horrific pig that I give the Dems the benefit of the doubt that they are not so dumb as to believe it would actually work.

So yeah, that would mean that Single Payer has been on their mind all along.

But the 2008 elections had long-term consequences. It gave the public something it didn't have before, and today's more pragmatic Republicans know that you just can't take something like that away. And that's why they're voting on Stupid, Horrific Pig 2.0 today. It's most likely too late to go back.
.

I agree the Dems knew exactly what would happen down the road once ObamaCare was instituted. It's my opinion we should stop struggling against the single payer universal coverage we will inevitably get, and just go for it. We deserve it. Then both sides of the aisle can start focusing on the real problem--why healthcare costs (not insurance) are so high.

Do you think we should go for it if you knew, if you were 100% sure that it would destroy the fabric of the nation and society as we know it forever?

I will not disagree with you that everyone "deserves" what ever they wish for, dream of, and most importantly, need. I will not disagree with you that everyone deserves the very best of care. But if you knew, that in the attempt to deliver that, all care will degrade and become less over time so that in the future, only the very rich and the elites will have care, would you still desire such a path forward?

Here is the important reality.

I learned at a very young age, the the study of economics is the study of a people's unlimited wants and needs, in a world of limited resources. Our job is to best decide how to distribute those resources.

How are the other successful countries of the world providing universal coverage and succeeding? Sure there are some problems, but nothing close to our "fail" rate to provide sensible healthcare to all our citizens without such fuss and bother.

I will tell you, and show you in easy to explain charts and graphs to make it simple if you like.

Name me one nation you believe is doing it successfully. I won't even quibble the point on whether they are doing it successfully or not.

All the countries in Europe? Let's pull one out of the hat: France.

France spends around 11% of it's GDP on healthcare.

In the US, we spend around 17% of it's GDP on healthcare.

OTH, there is this. . .

In this case, butter is health care.