Hitting the Nail On the Head

[namvet]

A quote I came across that sums up a lot of demonizing of Obama that the have no frigging plan RNC is now doing.

Conservatives lead the effort to demonize Obama because that’s easier than discussing the merits of Obama’s health care plan. They make it sound like providing access to health care providers is tantamount to repressing free speech. If anything, all the current protestors really demonstrate is how free this country really is.

When we finally get healthcare for all Americans who want it, people will look back and wonder what the hell all the protests from the right were all about.

They won't believe the crap like death panels and euthenasia that was paraded out to distract from real dialogue.

as usual your full a BS !!!!!

[youtube]q9GMKK_fWKg[/youtube]

 

[Care4all]

no problem on the dental, it is not even being considered as a part of the bill out there....

we need to increase the gvt/private sector allotment of doctors and nurses, ASAP!

DEMAND will increase SUPPLY naturally in a capitalistic market! If it doesn't, then maybe health care does not belong in the private sector, as it lies...because it doesn't follow the basic premise of capitalism...?

care

 

[Polk]

Yeah lets add 40 million people to the system and no new Drs
Cant possibly have a negative effect.

That assumes that being uninsured means you're outside the current system. It doesn't. All it means is that you wait until you get too sick to take it, then stick everyone else with the bill.

 

[Polk]

Yeah lets add 40 million people to the system and no new Drs
Cant possibly have a negative effect.

well letting everyone thsat couldn't afford a home loan have one didn't have a downside.....

That's what happens when you deregulate the banking sector.

 

[code1211]

Yeah lets add 40 million people to the system and no new Drs
Cant possibly have a negative effect.

well letting everyone thsat couldn't afford a home loan have one didn't have a downside.....

That's what happens when you deregulate the banking sector.

The banking sector was not deregulated. It was regulated and the lawmakers that passed the laws on which the regulations were based are responsible for the system that led to the toxic asset and unsecured investing and speculation that eventually brought the system down.

While there were some ciminals operating in all of this, most of the problems rose from companies trying to expand profits within the regulations.

 

[Diuretic]

no problem on the dental, it is not even being considered as a part of the bill out there....

we need to increase the gvt/private sector allotment of doctors and nurses, ASAP!

DEMAND will increase SUPPLY naturally in a capitalistic market! If it doesn't, then maybe health care does not belong in the private sector, as it lies...because it doesn't follow the basic premise of capitalism...?

care

I think demand related to supply might function to force up the price of a commodity or good. It's true that the reaction to shortage is for other suppliers to move in and begin to supply commodities or goods so that the price falls again and some sort of equilibrium is achieved but that requires a relatively quick response and that isn't going to happen with the provision of health care. It is a limited supply at the moment. It's limited both by natural scarcity (not everyone has the ability to be a medical practitioner for example) but also by guild-like behaviour of professional associations.

That's just one of the reasons I think that health care shouldn't be treated as a commodity to be bought and sold. The discussions we have here in the forums about health care, whether it be how it works in other countries or if or how it should be reformed in the US, seem to be predicated on health care as a commodity. Of course if we see it as a commodity we will focus on ways that individuals can pay for it as needed. But that assumes it should be a commodity. I disagree that it should and I've made that point in various threads here. I think that's Obama's problem. He failed to negotiate with the American people the nature of health care, he has gone along with the received wisdom that it should be a commodity, probably because Americans are possibly the strongest believers in the efficacy of markets in the world. Well it might just be that markets aren't useful for the management of health care.

 

[code1211]

no problem on the dental, it is not even being considered as a part of the bill out there....

we need to increase the gvt/private sector allotment of doctors and nurses, ASAP!

DEMAND will increase SUPPLY naturally in a capitalistic market! If it doesn't, then maybe health care does not belong in the private sector, as it lies...because it doesn't follow the basic premise of capitalism...?

care

I think demand related to supply might function to force up the price of a commodity or good. It's true that the reaction to shortage is for other suppliers to move in and begin to supply commodities or goods so that the price falls again and some sort of equilibrium is achieved but that requires a relatively quick response and that isn't going to happen with the provision of health care. It is a limited supply at the moment. It's limited both by natural scarcity (not everyone has the ability to be a medical practitioner for example) but also by guild-like behaviour of professional associations.

That's just one of the reasons I think that health care shouldn't be treated as a commodity to be bought and sold. The discussions we have here in the forums about health care, whether it be how it works in other countries or if or how it should be reformed in the US, seem to be predicated on health care as a commodity. Of course if we see it as a commodity we will focus on ways that individuals can pay for it as needed. But that assumes it should be a commodity. I disagree that it should and I've made that point in various threads here. I think that's Obama's problem. He failed to negotiate with the American people the nature of health care, he has gone along with the received wisdom that it should be a commodity, probably because Americans are possibly the strongest believers in the efficacy of markets in the world. Well it might just be that markets aren't useful for the management of health care.

I don't understand what you are saying with the highlighted portion.

How do you propose that healthcare be provided and funded? If it is not a commodity, does this mean it has no value or that it has no limit to it's supply? It certainly is not like air. Water is a commodity and everyone needs it. Still, it has a price.

What is the nature of health care as you see it and how does that make it into a non-commodity.

 

[Polk]

well letting everyone thsat couldn't afford a home loan have one didn't have a downside.....

That's what happens when you deregulate the banking sector.

The banking sector was not deregulated. It was regulated and the lawmakers that passed the laws on which the regulations were based are responsible for the system that led to the toxic asset and unsecured investing and speculation that eventually brought the system down.

While there were some ciminals operating in all of this, most of the problems rose from companies trying to expand profits within the regulations.

The primary cause of sub-prime mortgages was the breakdown of the barrier between commercial and investment banking. When banks have to keep the loans on their books, they're not willing to engage in a lot of risky lending. When that risk is removed by the ability to sell these loans as investment vehicles, the incentive to issue the fault loans greatly increases.

 

[Care4all]

That's what happens when you deregulate the banking sector.

The banking sector was not deregulated. It was regulated and the lawmakers that passed the laws on which the regulations were based are responsible for the system that led to the toxic asset and unsecured investing and speculation that eventually brought the system down.

While there were some ciminals operating in all of this, most of the problems rose from companies trying to expand profits within the regulations.

The primary cause of sub-prime mortgages was the breakdown of the barrier between commercial and investment banking. When banks have to keep the loans on their books, they're not willing to engage in a lot of risky lending. When that risk is removed by the ability to sell these loans as investment vehicles, the incentive to issue the fault loans greatly increases.

yep.

 

[Diuretic]

no problem on the dental, it is not even being considered as a part of the bill out there....

we need to increase the gvt/private sector allotment of doctors and nurses, ASAP!

DEMAND will increase SUPPLY naturally in a capitalistic market! If it doesn't, then maybe health care does not belong in the private sector, as it lies...because it doesn't follow the basic premise of capitalism...?

care

I think demand related to supply might function to force up the price of a commodity or good. It's true that the reaction to shortage is for other suppliers to move in and begin to supply commodities or goods so that the price falls again and some sort of equilibrium is achieved but that requires a relatively quick response and that isn't going to happen with the provision of health care. It is a limited supply at the moment. It's limited both by natural scarcity (not everyone has the ability to be a medical practitioner for example) but also by guild-like behaviour of professional associations.

That's just one of the reasons I think that health care shouldn't be treated as a commodity to be bought and sold. The discussions we have here in the forums about health care, whether it be how it works in other countries or if or how it should be reformed in the US, seem to be predicated on health care as a commodity. Of course if we see it as a commodity we will focus on ways that individuals can pay for it as needed. But that assumes it should be a commodity. I disagree that it should and I've made that point in various threads here. I think that's Obama's problem. He failed to negotiate with the American people the nature of health care, he has gone along with the received wisdom that it should be a commodity, probably because Americans are possibly the strongest believers in the efficacy of markets in the world. Well it might just be that markets aren't useful for the management of health care.

I don't understand what you are saying with the highlighted portion.

How do you propose that healthcare be provided and funded? If it is not a commodity, does this mean it has no value or that it has no limit to it's supply? It certainly is not like air. Water is a commodity and everyone needs it. Still, it has a price.

What is the nature of health care as you see it and how does that make it into a non-commodity.

You're right, that was sloppily expressed by me.

What I mean is that health care shouldn't be a commodity that is paid for by the consumer. It should be made available to every member of society as a basic right. You're right in that its various manifestations have to be paid for, my argument is that government makes that payment on behalf of consumers.