Fix health care and pay off the national debt in 6 years with the savings!!!

[EdwardBaiamonte]

How much cheaper?
figure 80% cheaper based on Cuba/Florida, East /West Germany and 132 other examples

Bullshit! Provide a link other than you constant babbling!

you can look it up for yourself to see that in Cuba they make $500/month whereas in Florida they make $5000. Still too complicated for you?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The average Cuban is dirt poor and barely surviving.

yes and the average Cuban in American is getting rich by comparison!! So some would conclude the American Republican system is far better, and that Americans can afford to buy a lot more stuff including health care!!! Surely you grasp the concept now?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

How much cheaper?
figure 80% cheaper based on Cuba/Florida, East /West Germany and 132 other examples

Bullshit! Provide a link other than you constant babbling!

you can look it up for yourself to see that in Cuba they make $500/month whereas in Florida they make $5000. Still too complicated for you?

So you agree that your data is bullshit and you agree with me?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The average Cuban is dirt poor and barely surviving.

yes and the average Cuban in American is getting rich by comparison!! So some would conclude the American Republican system is far better

I have to come to the conclusion that you are either insane or mentally retarded.

You just spent two posts proving me right and that you are completely off the grid.

Goodbye moron!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I have to come to the conclusion that you are either insane or mentally retarded.

You just spent two posts proving me right and that you are completely off the grid.

Goodbye moron!

translation: I lost that debate badly so I'll act like a tiny child

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You just spent two posts proving me right

then why so afraid to show us this proof?? What does your fear teach you?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So you agree that your data is bullshit and you agree with me?

I agree????? Where??? Why so afraid to show us where?????

 

[bripat9643]

exactly! Imagine how much car prices would be if the buyer did not care about price!! A simple concept but one way over a liberal's head, sadly for America.

No, imagine how much car prices would be if you had to buy a car or die.

You have to buy food or die, moron. Your theory is obvious bullshit.

Sent from my SM-G930U using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[usmbguest5318]

Simply put, I'm not about to accept your $3 trillion in savings assertion merely because you say it is so.

you have never heard of East /West Germany? North/South Korea? Cuba/Florida?

you don't understand that when people shop with their own money they spend far less than shopping with someone else's money??

You don't understand that under daily competitive pressure to survive a business will get more and more efficient with lower and lower prices whereas under no pressure they will not?? What is wrong with you?


in 1980 you paid 10 years pay in Hungary for a car without a gas gage(dip stick instead) that had to be backed up a hill because of a gravity fed carburetor.
They employed engineers by the 1000's all of whom swore that was the best they could do.

it is not until you have had years and years of free Republican competition that you have any idea how many engineers are needed and at what salary to produce what quality.

Can you understand the analogy?

you don't understand that when people shop with their own money they spend far less than shopping with someone else's money??

Well, then fine...If you want to accept Edward's claim, help him out in presenting the soundly credible empirical evidence that portends the high probability of "switching to a capitalist health insurance system" saving the U.S. $3 trillion.

Judging by your remarks above, it appears you think "people shop[ping] with their own money" facilitate achieving Edward's stated outcome. Okay....how much of the $3 trillion is recovered from that tactic? Same question as before? Where's the math that makes that something that anyone who knows the subject matter well [1] should believe is real?

Note:

1. The sole reason for the qualifying phrase, "who knows well," is that I'm not interested in what fools and novices think.

Edit:
Sorry, Edward. I thought I was replying to someone else. Forgive me, please for quoting you, responding directly to your post, and doing so by referring to you in the third person. My mistake.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Simply put, I'm not about to accept your $3 trillion in savings assertion merely because you say it is so.

you have never heard of East /West Germany? North/South Korea? Cuba/Florida?

you don't understand that when people shop with their own money they spend far less than shopping with someone else's money??

You don't understand that under daily competitive pressure to survive a business will get more and more efficient with lower and lower prices whereas under no pressure they will not?? What is wrong with you?


in 1980 you paid 10 years pay in Hungary for a car without a gas gage(dip stick instead) that had to be backed up a hill because of a gravity fed carburetor.
They employed engineers by the 1000's all of whom swore that was the best they could do.

it is not until you have had years and years of free Republican competition that you have any idea how many engineers are needed and at what salary to produce what quality.

Can you understand the analogy?

you don't understand that when people shop with their own money they spend far less than shopping with someone else's money??

Well, then fine...If you want to accept Edward's claim, help him out in presenting the soundly credible empirical evidence that portends the high probability of "switching to a capitalist health insurance system" saving the U.S. $3 trillion.

Judging by your remarks above, it appears you think "people shop[ping] with their own money" facilitate achieving Edward's stated outcome. Okay....how much of the $3 trillion is recovered from that tactic? Same question as before? Where's the math that makes that something that anyone who knows the subject matter well [1] should believe is real?

Note:

1. The sole reason for the qualifying phrase, "who knows well," is that I'm not interested in what fools and novices think.

Edit:
Sorry, Edward. I thought I was replying to someone else. Forgive me, please for quoting you, responding directly to your post, and doing so by referring to you in the third person. My mistake.

So you feel people shopping with free govt money will spend less than people shopping with their own money ??

So as a typical brain dead liberal you feel that when businesses compete for survival that actually raises their prices rather than lowers their prices? See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance?

 

[usmbguest5318]

Simply put, I'm not about to accept your $3 trillion in savings assertion merely because you say it is so.

you have never heard of East /West Germany? North/South Korea? Cuba/Florida?

you don't understand that when people shop with their own money they spend far less than shopping with someone else's money??

You don't understand that under daily competitive pressure to survive a business will get more and more efficient with lower and lower prices whereas under no pressure they will not?? What is wrong with you?


in 1980 you paid 10 years pay in Hungary for a car without a gas gage(dip stick instead) that had to be backed up a hill because of a gravity fed carburetor.
They employed engineers by the 1000's all of whom swore that was the best they could do.

it is not until you have had years and years of free Republican competition that you have any idea how many engineers are needed and at what salary to produce what quality.

Can you understand the analogy?

you don't understand that when people shop with their own money they spend far less than shopping with someone else's money??

Well, then fine...If you want to accept Edward's claim, help him out in presenting the soundly credible empirical evidence that portends the high probability of "switching to a capitalist health insurance system" saving the U.S. $3 trillion.

Judging by your remarks above, it appears you think "people shop[ping] with their own money" facilitate achieving Edward's stated outcome. Okay....how much of the $3 trillion is recovered from that tactic? Same question as before? Where's the math that makes that something that anyone who knows the subject matter well [1] should believe is real?

Note:

1. The sole reason for the qualifying phrase, "who knows well," is that I'm not interested in what fools and novices think.

Edit:
Sorry, Edward. I thought I was replying to someone else. Forgive me, please for quoting you, responding directly to your post, and doing so by referring to you in the third person. My mistake.

So you feel people shopping with free govt money will spend less than people shopping with their own money ??

So as a typical brain dead liberal you feel that when businesses compete for survival that actually raises their prices rather than lowers their prices? See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance?

Oh, f*ck....nevermind....

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Simply put, I'm not about to accept your $3 trillion in savings assertion merely because you say it is so.

you have never heard of East /West Germany? North/South Korea? Cuba/Florida?

you don't understand that when people shop with their own money they spend far less than shopping with someone else's money??

You don't understand that under daily competitive pressure to survive a business will get more and more efficient with lower and lower prices whereas under no pressure they will not?? What is wrong with you?


in 1980 you paid 10 years pay in Hungary for a car without a gas gage(dip stick instead) that had to be backed up a hill because of a gravity fed carburetor.
They employed engineers by the 1000's all of whom swore that was the best they could do.

it is not until you have had years and years of free Republican competition that you have any idea how many engineers are needed and at what salary to produce what quality.

Can you understand the analogy?

you don't understand that when people shop with their own money they spend far less than shopping with someone else's money??

Well, then fine...If you want to accept Edward's claim, help him out in presenting the soundly credible empirical evidence that portends the high probability of "switching to a capitalist health insurance system" saving the U.S. $3 trillion.

Judging by your remarks above, it appears you think "people shop[ping] with their own money" facilitate achieving Edward's stated outcome. Okay....how much of the $3 trillion is recovered from that tactic? Same question as before? Where's the math that makes that something that anyone who knows the subject matter well [1] should believe is real?

Note:

1. The sole reason for the qualifying phrase, "who knows well," is that I'm not interested in what fools and novices think.

Edit:
Sorry, Edward. I thought I was replying to someone else. Forgive me, please for quoting you, responding directly to your post, and doing so by referring to you in the third person. My mistake.

So you feel people shopping with free govt money will spend less than people shopping with their own money ??

So as a typical brain dead liberal you feel that when businesses compete for survival that actually raises their prices rather than lowers their prices? See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance?

Oh, f*ck....nevermind....

Ever see a conservative or libertarian have to run from the debate? What does that teach you?

 

[usmbguest5318]

Simply put, I'm not about to accept your $3 trillion in savings assertion merely because you say it is so.

you have never heard of East /West Germany? North/South Korea? Cuba/Florida?

you don't understand that when people shop with their own money they spend far less than shopping with someone else's money??

You don't understand that under daily competitive pressure to survive a business will get more and more efficient with lower and lower prices whereas under no pressure they will not?? What is wrong with you?


in 1980 you paid 10 years pay in Hungary for a car without a gas gage(dip stick instead) that had to be backed up a hill because of a gravity fed carburetor.
They employed engineers by the 1000's all of whom swore that was the best they could do.

it is not until you have had years and years of free Republican competition that you have any idea how many engineers are needed and at what salary to produce what quality.

Can you understand the analogy?

you don't understand that when people shop with their own money they spend far less than shopping with someone else's money??

Well, then fine...If you want to accept Edward's claim, help him out in presenting the soundly credible empirical evidence that portends the high probability of "switching to a capitalist health insurance system" saving the U.S. $3 trillion.

Judging by your remarks above, it appears you think "people shop[ping] with their own money" facilitate achieving Edward's stated outcome. Okay....how much of the $3 trillion is recovered from that tactic? Same question as before? Where's the math that makes that something that anyone who knows the subject matter well [1] should believe is real?

Note:

1. The sole reason for the qualifying phrase, "who knows well," is that I'm not interested in what fools and novices think.

Edit:
Sorry, Edward. I thought I was replying to someone else. Forgive me, please for quoting you, responding directly to your post, and doing so by referring to you in the third person. My mistake.

So you feel people shopping with free govt money will spend less than people shopping with their own money ??

So as a typical brain dead liberal you feel that when businesses compete for survival that actually raises their prices rather than lowers their prices? See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance?

Oh, f*ck....nevermind....

Ever see a conservative or libertarian have to run from the debate? What does that teach you?

I guess I should have been clearer. I'm done with trying to talk about this with you because I asked you a very specific question that calls for a specific type of information/response. You've avoided responding directly, and I'm fed up with your doing so.

I'm not "running" from the discussion; I've merely become bored by your obtuse responses. Quite simply, you no longer strike me as someone with whom I can have a mature discussion.

 

[SavannahMann]

it actually can be done!! All we have to do is switch our health care system from socialism to capitalism and use the saving to pay off the debt. Health care is about $4 trillion/year. We'd save about $3 trillion by switching to capitalism so entire national debt could be paid off in 6 years and America would, in effect, be saved from an always decreasing standard of living as we work just to pay off the debt.

Pfui. Strict Capitalism presumes that competition will drive down prices. The way you are talking the supply would have to far outstrip demand. Now this would happen when people couldn't afford the $600 MRI for their surgery. That by the way is the cash price with the cash discount. Far cheaper than the $1,800 cost to insurance. But still outside the ability of most people to pay.

Wait it gets worse in your silly scenario. So the poor who can't afford even basic healthcare would die off. The elderly would die off when they couldn't afford their meds. But the remaining healthy people would then not need so much healthcare so the supply would outstrip demand. Briefly.

The doubling or tripling of taxes would insure the politician who suggested this would be voted out of office in a flurry of outrage.

That would be necessary to pay off the debt. So then the middle class would have high tax bills and couldn't afford medical care either.

Medicine makes up 1/7th of the economy. That would dwindle dramatically as doctors and nurses and administration was laid off. No one could afford the doctors and they aren't doing it for fun. They have to get paid too you know. Eventually supply and demand would balance out. There would be one drug maker who charged whatever they wanted because costs were so high that no one could afford it. Doctors would be about where they are now as excess supply died out with the people who couldn't afford it.

Your vision is one where the old country doctor takes care of things. That has been surpassed by events long ago. A friend is looking at back surgery. The advances in that alone in the last two decades are astonishing. New meds to treat your heart, and erectile issues cost money to develop and test. Who pays for the development of the drugs?

Then we reach the end of your asinine scenario. We pay off the debt. Wanna bet that the Government cuts taxes then? Oh they might cut it a tiny amount but they always keep every damn dime they get. We become Venezuela over the next decade.

I've heard stupid ideas before. But you might make the top ten with this one.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

you have never heard of East /West Germany? North/South Korea? Cuba/Florida?

you don't understand that when people shop with their own money they spend far less than shopping with someone else's money??

You don't understand that under daily competitive pressure to survive a business will get more and more efficient with lower and lower prices whereas under no pressure they will not?? What is wrong with you?


in 1980 you paid 10 years pay in Hungary for a car without a gas gage(dip stick instead) that had to be backed up a hill because of a gravity fed carburetor.
They employed engineers by the 1000's all of whom swore that was the best they could do.

it is not until you have had years and years of free Republican competition that you have any idea how many engineers are needed and at what salary to produce what quality.

Can you understand the analogy?

you don't understand that when people shop with their own money they spend far less than shopping with someone else's money??

Well, then fine...If you want to accept Edward's claim, help him out in presenting the soundly credible empirical evidence that portends the high probability of "switching to a capitalist health insurance system" saving the U.S. $3 trillion.

Judging by your remarks above, it appears you think "people shop[ping] with their own money" facilitate achieving Edward's stated outcome. Okay....how much of the $3 trillion is recovered from that tactic? Same question as before? Where's the math that makes that something that anyone who knows the subject matter well [1] should believe is real?

Note:

1. The sole reason for the qualifying phrase, "who knows well," is that I'm not interested in what fools and novices think.

Edit:
Sorry, Edward. I thought I was replying to someone else. Forgive me, please for quoting you, responding directly to your post, and doing so by referring to you in the third person. My mistake.

So you feel people shopping with free govt money will spend less than people shopping with their own money ??

So as a typical brain dead liberal you feel that when businesses compete for survival that actually raises their prices rather than lowers their prices? See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance?

Oh, f*ck....nevermind....

Ever see a conservative or libertarian have to run from the debate? What does that teach you?

I guess I should have been clearer. I'm done with trying to talk about this with you because I asked you a very specific question that calls for a specific type of information/response. You've avoided responding directly, and I'm fed up with your doing so.

I'm not "running" from the discussion; I've merely become bored by your obtuse responses. Quite simply, you no longer strike me as someone with whom I can have a mature discussion.

How stupid does one have to be ask for data to explain that capitalism makes people rich??? Would you advise China to go back to socialism when 60 million starved to death. I'll be an idiot like you: Please show a specific link with necessary math to indicate that socialism really didn't starve 129 million to death in the US SR and read China

 

[usmbguest5318]

Well, then fine...If you want to accept Edward's claim, help him out in presenting the soundly credible empirical evidence that portends the high probability of "switching to a capitalist health insurance system" saving the U.S. $3 trillion.

Judging by your remarks above, it appears you think "people shop[ping] with their own money" facilitate achieving Edward's stated outcome. Okay....how much of the $3 trillion is recovered from that tactic? Same question as before? Where's the math that makes that something that anyone who knows the subject matter well [1] should believe is real?

Note:

1. The sole reason for the qualifying phrase, "who knows well," is that I'm not interested in what fools and novices think.

Edit:
Sorry, Edward. I thought I was replying to someone else. Forgive me, please for quoting you, responding directly to your post, and doing so by referring to you in the third person. My mistake.

So you feel people shopping with free govt money will spend less than people shopping with their own money ??

So as a typical brain dead liberal you feel that when businesses compete for survival that actually raises their prices rather than lowers their prices? See why we have to be positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance?

Oh, f*ck....nevermind....

Ever see a conservative or libertarian have to run from the debate? What does that teach you?

I guess I should have been clearer. I'm done with trying to talk about this with you because I asked you a very specific question that calls for a specific type of information/response. You've avoided responding directly, and I'm fed up with your doing so.

I'm not "running" from the discussion; I've merely become bored by your obtuse responses. Quite simply, you no longer strike me as someone with whom I can have a mature discussion.

How stupid does one have to be ask for data to explain that capitalism makes people rich??? Would you advise China to go back to socialism when 60 million starved to death. I'll be an idiot like you: Please show a specific link with necessary math to indicate that socialism really didn't starve 129 million to death in the US SR and read China

How stupid does one have to be ask for data to explain that capitalism makes people rich???

LMAFO!!!! Dude, is that truly what you think I requested? If so, I understand why you didn't provide the info/case I asked for. It's because you don't know what was being requested.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The way you are talking the supply would have to far outstrip demand..

what????????????? what would change with capitalism is price would go down 80% because of competition. Do you understand that when businesses compete to survive there in incentive to offer a lower and lower price?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Wait it gets worse in your silly scenario. So the poor who can't afford even basic healthcare would die off.

???????why would they die off when they are getting a voucher to pay for their health care according to OP???

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The doubling or tripling of taxes would insure the politician who suggested this would be voted out of office in a flurry of outrage.

taxes would stay the same!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and we would spend the same on medical care on day one, but thereafter competition would drive down prices 80% lowering taxes $8000 per person unless of course we elected to use the saving to pay off the national debt.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I've heard stupid ideas before. But you might make the top ten with this one.

but can you say why the idea is stupid??? Do you even realize its important to have a reason behind what you assert?