Libertarians Are The True Political Moderates

And there are two extremes of ideologues...

You keep posting this "Myths of The Free Market". The reason I've not responded to it is because it's just another strawman. The author makes up 'myths' about the free market and then debunks them. Whatever. The only thing the free market 'promises' that matters to me is freedom. You could show me, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that our nation would be safer, more productive and live longer if we all submitted to a state run economy and I'd still reject it outright. I don't want to live as a slave. If you do, have at it. Just don't expect me to sign up.

I support the free market, not because it will maximize GDP, or optimize national performance in any way, but because it preserves the freedom to live our lives as we wish.
 
Last edited:
And there are two extremes of ideologues...

You keep posting this "Myths of The Free Market". The reason I've not responded to it is because it's just another strawman. The author makes up 'myths' about the free market and then debunks them. Whatever. The only thing the free market 'promises' that matters to me is freedom. You could show me, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that our nation would be safer, more productive and live longer if we all submitted to a state run economy and I'd still reject it outright. I don't want to live as a slave. If you do, have at it. Just don't expect me to sign up.

I support the free market, not because it will maximize GDP, or optimize national performance in any way, but because it preserves the freedom to live our lives as we wish.

You see...ANYONE who doesn't submit to the extreme 'Marketist' dogma MUST want a " state run economy"...

How about a mixed economy which performs best? How about environmental laws that protect human health and life? How about consumer protection that prevents swindlers from stealing from the citizenry.

But take heart...there is a Utopia for you no government intervention laissez-faire extreme ideologues...

SOMALIA...
 
And there are two extremes of ideologues...

You keep posting this "Myths of The Free Market". The reason I've not responded to it is because it's just another strawman. The author makes up 'myths' about the free market and then debunks them. Whatever. The only thing the free market 'promises' that matters to me is freedom. You could show me, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that our nation would be safer, more productive and live longer if we all submitted to a state run economy and I'd still reject it outright. I don't want to live as a slave. If you do, have at it. Just don't expect me to sign up.

I support the free market, not because it will maximize GDP, or optimize national performance in any way, but because it preserves the freedom to live our lives as we wish.

You see...ANYONE who doesn't submit to the extreme 'Marketist' dogma MUST want a " state run economy"...

Well, yeah. A 'mixed economy' is partially state-run. You don't get that?

SOMALIA...

Heh... I'm surprised you weren't screeching this earlier. It's usually the go-to war-cry for lib haters.
 
Commerce Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Commerce Clause describes an enumerated power listed in the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3). The clause states that the United States Congress shall have power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." Courts and commentators have tended to discuss each of these three areas of commerce as a separate power granted to Congress.[1] It is common to see the individual components of the Commerce Clause referred to under specific terms: The Foreign Commerce Clause, the Interstate Commerce Clause,[2] and the Indian Commerce Clause.

Libertarians tend to believe in the Constitution. My opinion and I would think they'd agree.

Under the Constitution the Gov't has the ENUMERATED POWERS which include Regulating Commerce. On this very thread someone said they aren't against regulations on the Markets. I believe it was Kaz that said it.

So I'm having a fairly hard time understanding why people want to club them over the head for their views with the Free Market.

Free Markets DO WORK, if the markets are based off of SUPPLY AND DEMAND. Not what we have today, which is BS. What we have is manipulation of currency and rigged Markets with the same. It was supposed to be something different, but isn't.

Companies should rise or fall on their products and sells of the same. Not someone trading their stock to insanity. Comparing a True Free Market to what we actually have to day is BS.
 
And there are two extremes of ideologues...

You keep posting this "Myths of The Free Market". The reason I've not responded to it is because it's just another strawman. The author makes up 'myths' about the free market and then debunks them. Whatever. The only thing the free market 'promises' that matters to me is freedom. You could show me, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that our nation would be safer, more productive and live longer if we all submitted to a state run economy and I'd still reject it outright. I don't want to live as a slave. If you do, have at it. Just don't expect me to sign up.

I support the free market, not because it will maximize GDP, or optimize national performance in any way, but because it preserves the freedom to live our lives as we wish.

Seconded.
 
You keep posting this "Myths of The Free Market". The reason I've not responded to it is because it's just another strawman. The author makes up 'myths' about the free market and then debunks them. Whatever. The only thing the free market 'promises' that matters to me is freedom. You could show me, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that our nation would be safer, more productive and live longer if we all submitted to a state run economy and I'd still reject it outright. I don't want to live as a slave. If you do, have at it. Just don't expect me to sign up.

I support the free market, not because it will maximize GDP, or optimize national performance in any way, but because it preserves the freedom to live our lives as we wish.

You see...ANYONE who doesn't submit to the extreme 'Marketist' dogma MUST want a " state run economy"...

Well, yeah. A 'mixed economy' is partially state-run. You don't get that?

SOMALIA...

Heh... I'm surprised you weren't screeching this earlier. It's usually the go-to war-cry for lib haters.

Yes, a mixed economy is partially state run. There are many thing the market handles best, but there are also many things the market never will handle even moderately well. Not everything in this world can be measured by profit margins. And it is always some group of humans that are not 'market' desirable who are left out.

The best example is health care and the elderly. Insurance companies don't want to insure the elderly. They are high risk, low reward customers. Before Medicare, the elderly were the most likely citizens to end up in poverty. Since Medicare was enacted the elderly are among the least likely to end up in financial ruin. And American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Insurance corporations are not in the health care business. they are in the profit business.

There are people employed by insurance companies whose sole job is to go over your health records with a fine tooth comb and find a loophole, a previous treatment for a mole, wart or something they can create a link to your current illness, and they get rewarded for finding and denying treatment.

THAT my naive friend is how a 'free market' works. Insurance companies are not in the healthcare business. They are in the PROFIT business. Denial of expensive treatments feed the bottom line.

Do you understand the keys to a market transaction? Do you understand the term 'leverage'? If one party in a market transaction has little or no leverage, it is NOT a free market. It is a captured market.

The whole basis of a 'free market' is the buyer has leverage, i.e. he/she can take his/her business elsewhere. That works perfectly fine when the stakes are 'things' (cars or TV sets etc). But a person's health is not a 'thing', and the consumer's stake is their very life. An unhappy consumer can go buys a different car or TV. If a person has a life threatening illness and is denied coverage for treatment, WHAT leverage does that person have...take their business elsewhere IN ANOTHER LIFE?
 
You see...ANYONE who doesn't submit to the extreme 'Marketist' dogma MUST want a " state run economy"...

Well, yeah. A 'mixed economy' is partially state-run. You don't get that?

SOMALIA...

Heh... I'm surprised you weren't screeching this earlier. It's usually the go-to war-cry for lib haters.

Yes, a mixed economy is partially state run. There are many thing the market handles best, but there are also many things the market never will handle even moderately well. Not everything in this world can be measured by profit margins. And it is always some group of humans that are not 'market' desirable who are left out.

The best example is health care and the elderly. Insurance companies don't want to insure the elderly. They are high risk, low reward customers. Before Medicare, the elderly were the most likely citizens to end up in poverty. Since Medicare was enacted the elderly are among the least likely to end up in financial ruin. And American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Insurance corporations are not in the health care business. they are in the profit business.

There are people employed by insurance companies whose sole job is to go over your health records with a fine tooth comb and find a loophole, a previous treatment for a mole, wart or something they can create a link to your current illness, and they get rewarded for finding and denying treatment.

THAT my naive friend is how a 'free market' works. Insurance companies are not in the healthcare business. They are in the PROFIT business. Denial of expensive treatments feed the bottom line.

Do you understand the keys to a market transaction? Do you understand the term 'leverage'? If one party in a market transaction has little or no leverage, it is NOT a free market. It is a captured market.

The whole basis of a 'free market' is the buyer has leverage, i.e. he/she can take his/her business elsewhere. That works perfectly fine when the stakes are 'things' (cars or TV sets etc). But a person's health is not a 'thing', and the consumer's stake is their very life. An unhappy consumer can go buys a different car or TV. If a person has a life threatening illness and is denied coverage for treatment, WHAT leverage does that person have...take their business elsewhere IN ANOTHER LIFE?

All of this stems from the flawed belief that the best way to pay for costly things is have a third party pay.

That and the even more flawed assumption that a program which costs well in excess of ten times what it was projected to cost when set in motion is a success.

Your authoritarian statist ship of foolishness seems to keep running aground. :lol:
 
You see...ANYONE who doesn't submit to the extreme 'Marketist' dogma MUST want a " state run economy"...

Well, yeah. A 'mixed economy' is partially state-run. You don't get that?

SOMALIA...
Heh... I'm surprised you weren't screeching this earlier. It's usually the go-to war-cry for lib haters.

Yes, a mixed economy is partially state run. There are many thing the market handles best, but there are also many things the market never will handle even moderately well. Not everything in this world can be measured by profit margins. And it is always some group of humans that are not 'market' desirable who are left out.

The best example is health care and the elderly. Insurance companies don't want to insure the elderly. They are high risk, low reward customers. Before Medicare, the elderly were the most likely citizens to end up in poverty. Since Medicare was enacted the elderly are among the least likely to end up in financial ruin. And American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Insurance corporations are not in the health care business. they are in the profit business.

There are people employed by insurance companies whose sole job is to go over your health records with a fine tooth comb and find a loophole, a previous treatment for a mole, wart or something they can create a link to your current illness, and they get rewarded for finding and denying treatment.

THAT my naive friend is how a 'free market' works. Insurance companies are not in the healthcare business. They are in the PROFIT business. Denial of expensive treatments feed the bottom line.

Do you understand the keys to a market transaction? Do you understand the term 'leverage'? If one party in a market transaction has little or no leverage, it is NOT a free market. It is a captured market.

The whole basis of a 'free market' is the buyer has leverage, i.e. he/she can take his/her business elsewhere. That works perfectly fine when the stakes are 'things' (cars or TV sets etc). But a person's health is not a 'thing', and the consumer's stake is their very life. An unhappy consumer can go buys a different car or TV. If a person has a life threatening illness and is denied coverage for treatment, WHAT leverage does that person have...take their business elsewhere IN ANOTHER LIFE?

The best example is health care? Because insurance companies don't want to insure elderly people?

Can you cite actual examples to back up your argument, or are we just supposed to assume that, because you managed to be coherent enough to type, it must be true?
 
Well, yeah. A 'mixed economy' is partially state-run. You don't get that?



Heh... I'm surprised you weren't screeching this earlier. It's usually the go-to war-cry for lib haters.

Yes, a mixed economy is partially state run. There are many thing the market handles best, but there are also many things the market never will handle even moderately well. Not everything in this world can be measured by profit margins. And it is always some group of humans that are not 'market' desirable who are left out.

The best example is health care and the elderly. Insurance companies don't want to insure the elderly. They are high risk, low reward customers. Before Medicare, the elderly were the most likely citizens to end up in poverty. Since Medicare was enacted the elderly are among the least likely to end up in financial ruin. And American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Insurance corporations are not in the health care business. they are in the profit business.

There are people employed by insurance companies whose sole job is to go over your health records with a fine tooth comb and find a loophole, a previous treatment for a mole, wart or something they can create a link to your current illness, and they get rewarded for finding and denying treatment.

THAT my naive friend is how a 'free market' works. Insurance companies are not in the healthcare business. They are in the PROFIT business. Denial of expensive treatments feed the bottom line.

Do you understand the keys to a market transaction? Do you understand the term 'leverage'? If one party in a market transaction has little or no leverage, it is NOT a free market. It is a captured market.

The whole basis of a 'free market' is the buyer has leverage, i.e. he/she can take his/her business elsewhere. That works perfectly fine when the stakes are 'things' (cars or TV sets etc). But a person's health is not a 'thing', and the consumer's stake is their very life. An unhappy consumer can go buys a different car or TV. If a person has a life threatening illness and is denied coverage for treatment, WHAT leverage does that person have...take their business elsewhere IN ANOTHER LIFE?

All of this stems from the flawed belief that the best way to pay for costly things is have a third party pay.

That and the even more flawed assumption that a program which costs well in excess of ten times what it was projected to cost when set in motion is a success.

Your authoritarian statist ship of foolishness seems to keep running aground. :lol:

While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians


You have 'flawed' propaganda from true authoritarians who reside on the right, not the left. Authoritarians kill people. Liberals protect people, especially the least among us.

Social Security and Medicare have not cost 'third parties' anything. They are social insurance programs. They are pay-go programs.

SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE

Social Security and Medicare have been prominent in the deficit and debt ceiling debate. Unfortunately, there is much misinformation and misunderstanding on how these programs work. Below are some key points to keep in mind about these important programs.

Social Security (SS) is NOT broke and despite claims to the contrary, Social Security does NOT contribute to the National debt or the deficit. By law, Social Security cannot borrow from the general fund and general funds cannot be appropriated for operational costs without changing the law. In 1983, to address the retirement of the baby boomers, President Reagan signed into law a bill raising the SS payroll tax and the retirement age.

The result is a $2.6 Trillion surplus in the SS trust fund held in the form of special issue Treasury notes – this means that SS actually loans money to the US Treasury. When SS expenses exceed SS income, Treasury notes are called and the Treasury must come up with the funds to cover the call, but this is NOT deficit spending. When Treasury notes are redeemed, the government debt to the SS trust is decreased, not increased. Even if no changes are made to SS taxes or benefits (unlikely), full benefits are still payable until 2036, after which 75% of benefits will still be paid without adding to the debt or the deficit.

Similarly, Medicare’s Hospital Insurance – Part “A” Trust Fund has a $272 Billion surplus in the form of special issue Treasury notes, but this Trust Fund is being exhausted at a more rapid rate than the SS Trust Fund. Two primary factors are driving Medicare expenditures to exceed income – increased enrollment and increased medical care expenses.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is moderating the increase in costs of medical care. However measured, the ACA brings about “sizable improvement in the financial outlook for Medicare compared to the law in effect prior to the Affordable Care Act”. If the ACA is repealed or defunded, the effect will drive up expenditures from the Medicare Trust Fund and accelerate the date of exhaustion of the fund. While Medicare does face a shortfall, it is NOT going bankrupt. Absent any corrective action (again, not likely), when the Trust fund becomes exhausted projected to occur in 2024, its income from Medicare payroll taxes and other sources will meet 90 percent of its projected obligations without adding to the debt or the deficit. Note that Medicare Parts “B” and “D” are self sustaining due to automatic income adjustments.

Although Medicare expenditures are high, they “have grown more slowly than insurance premiums over the past 40 years”. "A private health insurance plan covering the standardized benefit would, CBO estimates, be more expensive currently than traditional Medicare. Both administrative costs (including profits) and payment rates to providers are higher for private plans than for Medicare." However, according to a recent study, 12% of medical professionals are currently refusing to accept private insurance due to administrative burden and inadequate reimbursement rates. The corresponding Medicare refusal rate is 7%.



We have all made mistakes. But Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the sins of the cold-blooded and the sins of the warm-hearted on different scales. Better the occasional faults of a party living in the spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a party frozen in the ice of its own indifference.
President John F. Kennedy

"It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners"
Albert Camus
 
Last edited:
Well, yeah. A 'mixed economy' is partially state-run. You don't get that?

Heh... I'm surprised you weren't screeching this earlier. It's usually the go-to war-cry for lib haters.

Yes, a mixed economy is partially state run. There are many thing the market handles best, but there are also many things the market never will handle even moderately well. Not everything in this world can be measured by profit margins. And it is always some group of humans that are not 'market' desirable who are left out.

The best example is health care and the elderly. Insurance companies don't want to insure the elderly. They are high risk, low reward customers. Before Medicare, the elderly were the most likely citizens to end up in poverty. Since Medicare was enacted the elderly are among the least likely to end up in financial ruin. And American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Insurance corporations are not in the health care business. they are in the profit business.

There are people employed by insurance companies whose sole job is to go over your health records with a fine tooth comb and find a loophole, a previous treatment for a mole, wart or something they can create a link to your current illness, and they get rewarded for finding and denying treatment.

THAT my naive friend is how a 'free market' works. Insurance companies are not in the healthcare business. They are in the PROFIT business. Denial of expensive treatments feed the bottom line.

Do you understand the keys to a market transaction? Do you understand the term 'leverage'? If one party in a market transaction has little or no leverage, it is NOT a free market. It is a captured market.

The whole basis of a 'free market' is the buyer has leverage, i.e. he/she can take his/her business elsewhere. That works perfectly fine when the stakes are 'things' (cars or TV sets etc). But a person's health is not a 'thing', and the consumer's stake is their very life. An unhappy consumer can go buys a different car or TV. If a person has a life threatening illness and is denied coverage for treatment, WHAT leverage does that person have...take their business elsewhere IN ANOTHER LIFE?

The best example is health care? Because insurance companies don't want to insure elderly people?

Can you cite actual examples to back up your argument, or are we just supposed to assume that, because you managed to be coherent enough to type, it must be true?

nopPUFh.png


By Samuel Metz, M.D.

Medicare assures health care for seniors who might otherwise find health care inaccessible. It saves our government money. It makes the lives of our seniors better.

Two concepts inspired Medicare. First, seniors require more care than younger Americans. Second, seniors usually live on less income; many survive only on Social Security. This combination renders seniors extremely vulnerable to losing their savings, homes or lives from easily treatable diseases.

And Medicare provides good care. American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Every industrialized nation guarantees health care for seniors. Indeed, we are unhappily distinctive in being the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee care for everyone else, as well. Medicare restores us to a civilized status.

Before Medicare, only 40 percent of nonworking seniors had health insurance, and of those with coverage, private insurance paid for less than 10 percent of their hospital bills. The principle of insuring only the healthy who consume little care and avoiding the sick has always driven our private insurance industry. No insurance company can make money by offering the same comprehensive, affordable coverage to seniors as Medicare, so they don't offer it. Our experience with Medicare Advantage, an effort to privatize parts of Medicare, resulted in our government spending $17 billion more for the same benefits available through Medicare. Our private insurance industry was in no hurry to insure seniors before Medicare started. They are in no hurry now. Medicare revolutionized health care access for seniors.

Why is Medicare expensive? Simply, health care for seniors will always cost more than that of healthier, younger Americans. And costs are rising in every health care system around the world, not just Medicare. The United States is doubly cursed because our costs are rising faster and are already twice as expensive as other countries. Though hard to believe, Medicare is a leader in fighting cost increases. Private insurance industry costs are rising nearly twice as fast as those of Medicare. And when it comes to administrative expenses, private insurance is 10 times higher than Medicare. In fact, if the single payer financing of Medicare were applied to citizens of all ages, we would save $350 billion annually, more than enough to provide comprehensive health care to every American.

Medicare is good for our seniors and good for our country. It provides health care far more affordably and efficiently than our private insurance industry. It saves our country hundreds of billions of dollars in administrative overhead. And if we expand Medicare to cover younger, healthier Americans, we would all get more care at less cost.

Medicare: Celebrate it, protect it, improve it, and expand it. We need more Medicare, not less.


Portland physician Samuel Metz is a member of Physicians for a National Health Program and a founding member of Mad As Hell Doctors.
 
Yes, a mixed economy is partially state run. There are many thing the market handles best, but there are also many things the market never will handle even moderately well. Not everything in this world can be measured by profit margins. And it is always some group of humans that are not 'market' desirable who are left out.

The best example is health care and the elderly. Insurance companies don't want to insure the elderly. They are high risk, low reward customers. Before Medicare, the elderly were the most likely citizens to end up in poverty. Since Medicare was enacted the elderly are among the least likely to end up in financial ruin. And American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Insurance corporations are not in the health care business. they are in the profit business.

There are people employed by insurance companies whose sole job is to go over your health records with a fine tooth comb and find a loophole, a previous treatment for a mole, wart or something they can create a link to your current illness, and they get rewarded for finding and denying treatment.

THAT my naive friend is how a 'free market' works. Insurance companies are not in the healthcare business. They are in the PROFIT business. Denial of expensive treatments feed the bottom line.

Do you understand the keys to a market transaction? Do you understand the term 'leverage'? If one party in a market transaction has little or no leverage, it is NOT a free market. It is a captured market.

The whole basis of a 'free market' is the buyer has leverage, i.e. he/she can take his/her business elsewhere. That works perfectly fine when the stakes are 'things' (cars or TV sets etc). But a person's health is not a 'thing', and the consumer's stake is their very life. An unhappy consumer can go buys a different car or TV. If a person has a life threatening illness and is denied coverage for treatment, WHAT leverage does that person have...take their business elsewhere IN ANOTHER LIFE?

The best example is health care? Because insurance companies don't want to insure elderly people?

Can you cite actual examples to back up your argument, or are we just supposed to assume that, because you managed to be coherent enough to type, it must be true?

nopPUFh.png


By Samuel Metz, M.D.

Medicare assures health care for seniors who might otherwise find health care inaccessible. It saves our government money. It makes the lives of our seniors better.

Two concepts inspired Medicare. First, seniors require more care than younger Americans. Second, seniors usually live on less income; many survive only on Social Security. This combination renders seniors extremely vulnerable to losing their savings, homes or lives from easily treatable diseases.

And Medicare provides good care. American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Every industrialized nation guarantees health care for seniors. Indeed, we are unhappily distinctive in being the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee care for everyone else, as well. Medicare restores us to a civilized status.

Before Medicare, only 40 percent of nonworking seniors had health insurance, and of those with coverage, private insurance paid for less than 10 percent of their hospital bills. The principle of insuring only the healthy who consume little care and avoiding the sick has always driven our private insurance industry. No insurance company can make money by offering the same comprehensive, affordable coverage to seniors as Medicare, so they don't offer it. Our experience with Medicare Advantage, an effort to privatize parts of Medicare, resulted in our government spending $17 billion more for the same benefits available through Medicare. Our private insurance industry was in no hurry to insure seniors before Medicare started. They are in no hurry now. Medicare revolutionized health care access for seniors.

Why is Medicare expensive? Simply, health care for seniors will always cost more than that of healthier, younger Americans. And costs are rising in every health care system around the world, not just Medicare. The United States is doubly cursed because our costs are rising faster and are already twice as expensive as other countries. Though hard to believe, Medicare is a leader in fighting cost increases. Private insurance industry costs are rising nearly twice as fast as those of Medicare. And when it comes to administrative expenses, private insurance is 10 times higher than Medicare. In fact, if the single payer financing of Medicare were applied to citizens of all ages, we would save $350 billion annually, more than enough to provide comprehensive health care to every American.

Medicare is good for our seniors and good for our country. It provides health care far more affordably and efficiently than our private insurance industry. It saves our country hundreds of billions of dollars in administrative overhead. And if we expand Medicare to cover younger, healthier Americans, we would all get more care at less cost.

Medicare: Celebrate it, protect it, improve it, and expand it. We need more Medicare, not less.


Portland physician Samuel Metz is a member of Physicians for a National Health Program and a founding member of Mad As Hell Doctors.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=t5Ha7RNpn24]Obama In November 2009: Right, One-Third Of ObamaCare Funding Comes From Cuts To Medicare - YouTube[/ame]
 
The best example is health care? Because insurance companies don't want to insure elderly people?

Can you cite actual examples to back up your argument, or are we just supposed to assume that, because you managed to be coherent enough to type, it must be true?

nopPUFh.png


By Samuel Metz, M.D.

Medicare assures health care for seniors who might otherwise find health care inaccessible. It saves our government money. It makes the lives of our seniors better.

Two concepts inspired Medicare. First, seniors require more care than younger Americans. Second, seniors usually live on less income; many survive only on Social Security. This combination renders seniors extremely vulnerable to losing their savings, homes or lives from easily treatable diseases.

And Medicare provides good care. American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Every industrialized nation guarantees health care for seniors. Indeed, we are unhappily distinctive in being the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee care for everyone else, as well. Medicare restores us to a civilized status.

Before Medicare, only 40 percent of nonworking seniors had health insurance, and of those with coverage, private insurance paid for less than 10 percent of their hospital bills. The principle of insuring only the healthy who consume little care and avoiding the sick has always driven our private insurance industry. No insurance company can make money by offering the same comprehensive, affordable coverage to seniors as Medicare, so they don't offer it. Our experience with Medicare Advantage, an effort to privatize parts of Medicare, resulted in our government spending $17 billion more for the same benefits available through Medicare. Our private insurance industry was in no hurry to insure seniors before Medicare started. They are in no hurry now. Medicare revolutionized health care access for seniors.

Why is Medicare expensive? Simply, health care for seniors will always cost more than that of healthier, younger Americans. And costs are rising in every health care system around the world, not just Medicare. The United States is doubly cursed because our costs are rising faster and are already twice as expensive as other countries. Though hard to believe, Medicare is a leader in fighting cost increases. Private insurance industry costs are rising nearly twice as fast as those of Medicare. And when it comes to administrative expenses, private insurance is 10 times higher than Medicare. In fact, if the single payer financing of Medicare were applied to citizens of all ages, we would save $350 billion annually, more than enough to provide comprehensive health care to every American.

Medicare is good for our seniors and good for our country. It provides health care far more affordably and efficiently than our private insurance industry. It saves our country hundreds of billions of dollars in administrative overhead. And if we expand Medicare to cover younger, healthier Americans, we would all get more care at less cost.

Medicare: Celebrate it, protect it, improve it, and expand it. We need more Medicare, not less.


Portland physician Samuel Metz is a member of Physicians for a National Health Program and a founding member of Mad As Hell Doctors.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=t5Ha7RNpn24]Obama In November 2009: Right, One-Third Of ObamaCare Funding Comes From Cuts To Medicare - YouTube[/ame]

h4nLnB1.png


Fact Check: ObamacareÂ’s Medicare Cuts

Since the Romney-Ryan campaign is hammering the Obama-Biden ticket on the Affordable Care ActÂ’s $716 billion in cuts to Medicare, it seems useful to put this figure in context and explain exactly what programs within Medicare lose funding under the health care law.

First, the context. The Congressional Budget Office estimates Medicare spending over the next 10 years will be about $7.5 trillion. This means the ACAÂ’s Medicare cuts account for less than 10% of overall Medicare spending. The program is not being gutted. Even with the ACA cuts, the CBO says the cost of Medicare is expected to grow from about $500 billion in 2012 to nearly $900 billion by 2022.

As for the cuts, they come from eliminating a massive subsidy to private insurers and gradually reducing the rate of growth in payments to some providers. These changes, while not catastrophic for Medicare, are important. Under the ACA, the federal government will substantially reduce the amount it spends funding Medicare Advantage, which is privately administered insurance offered to Medicare beneficiaries. About one-quarter of Medicare recipients are enrolled in private Medicare Advantage. In theory, these plans are supposed to manage health care spending better than fee-for-service Medicare. But they donÂ’t actually save the federal government any money. They cost, per patient, 14% more than traditional Medicare. (See Figure 3 of this fact sheet from the Kaiser Family Foundation. And see here for more.) The ACA eliminates this subsidy and pegs Medicare Advantage payments to quality metrics.

The second bunch of money that gets cut from Medicare under Obamacare comes from providers. Hospitals, home health agencies and others will see Medicare payments grow more slowly than they have in the past.

Medicare benefits will not change – in theory. However, providers who get paid less from Medicare in the future may be less inclined to accept Medicare patients, thereby reducing access. The frequently criticized Independent Payment Advisory Board, created by the ACA, could cut provider payments even more to keep the growth in Medicare spending under a benchmark. If Medicare per capita spending grows faster than a rate pegged to inflation and later GDP, IPAB will be empowered to recommend provider payment cuts. If Congress can’t find alternative ways to keep Medicare spending growth under the inflation or GDP benchmark, the IPAB recommendations will automatically go into effect. This too could reduce access. Bonus Medicare Advantage benefits – like free gym memberships – may go away.

In exchange for these kinds of reductions in Medicare spending, funding for the program was bolstered in other ways by the ACA. Preventive care is now covered at 100% for Medicare beneficiaries and a gap in Medicare prescription drug coverage will slowly close under the law. Some Medicare beneficiaries, primarily wealthy Americans, will pay higher Medicare premiums and taxes under the ACA.

The idea, however, that the Affordable Care Act struck a dangerous blow to Medicare that will change the program in fundamental ways is untrue. Under the new law, Medicare will remain a wildly popular, public single-payer health insurance system that provides comprehensive coverage to millions of Americans.
 
Yes, a mixed economy is partially state run. There are many thing the market handles best, but there are also many things the market never will handle even moderately well. Not everything in this world can be measured by profit margins. And it is always some group of humans that are not 'market' desirable who are left out.

The best example is health care and the elderly. Insurance companies don't want to insure the elderly. They are high risk, low reward customers. Before Medicare, the elderly were the most likely citizens to end up in poverty. Since Medicare was enacted the elderly are among the least likely to end up in financial ruin. And American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Insurance corporations are not in the health care business. they are in the profit business.

There are people employed by insurance companies whose sole job is to go over your health records with a fine tooth comb and find a loophole, a previous treatment for a mole, wart or something they can create a link to your current illness, and they get rewarded for finding and denying treatment.

THAT my naive friend is how a 'free market' works. Insurance companies are not in the healthcare business. They are in the PROFIT business. Denial of expensive treatments feed the bottom line.

Do you understand the keys to a market transaction? Do you understand the term 'leverage'? If one party in a market transaction has little or no leverage, it is NOT a free market. It is a captured market.

The whole basis of a 'free market' is the buyer has leverage, i.e. he/she can take his/her business elsewhere. That works perfectly fine when the stakes are 'things' (cars or TV sets etc). But a person's health is not a 'thing', and the consumer's stake is their very life. An unhappy consumer can go buys a different car or TV. If a person has a life threatening illness and is denied coverage for treatment, WHAT leverage does that person have...take their business elsewhere IN ANOTHER LIFE?

All of this stems from the flawed belief that the best way to pay for costly things is have a third party pay.

That and the even more flawed assumption that a program which costs well in excess of ten times what it was projected to cost when set in motion is a success.

Your authoritarian statist ship of foolishness seems to keep running aground. :lol:

While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians


You have 'flawed' propaganda from true authoritarians who reside on the right, not the left. Authoritarians kill people. Liberals protect people, especially the least among us.

Social Security and Medicare have not cost 'third parties' anything. They are social insurance programs. They are pay-go programs.

SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE

Social Security and Medicare have been prominent in the deficit and debt ceiling debate. Unfortunately, there is much misinformation and misunderstanding on how these programs work. Below are some key points to keep in mind about these important programs.

Social Security (SS) is NOT broke and despite claims to the contrary, Social Security does NOT contribute to the National debt or the deficit. By law, Social Security cannot borrow from the general fund and general funds cannot be appropriated for operational costs without changing the law. In 1983, to address the retirement of the baby boomers, President Reagan signed into law a bill raising the SS payroll tax and the retirement age.

The result is a $2.6 Trillion surplus in the SS trust fund held in the form of special issue Treasury notes – this means that SS actually loans money to the US Treasury. When SS expenses exceed SS income, Treasury notes are called and the Treasury must come up with the funds to cover the call, but this is NOT deficit spending. When Treasury notes are redeemed, the government debt to the SS trust is decreased, not increased. Even if no changes are made to SS taxes or benefits (unlikely), full benefits are still payable until 2036, after which 75% of benefits will still be paid without adding to the debt or the deficit.

Similarly, Medicare’s Hospital Insurance – Part “A” Trust Fund has a $272 Billion surplus in the form of special issue Treasury notes, but this Trust Fund is being exhausted at a more rapid rate than the SS Trust Fund. Two primary factors are driving Medicare expenditures to exceed income – increased enrollment and increased medical care expenses.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is moderating the increase in costs of medical care. However measured, the ACA brings about “sizable improvement in the financial outlook for Medicare compared to the law in effect prior to the Affordable Care Act”. If the ACA is repealed or defunded, the effect will drive up expenditures from the Medicare Trust Fund and accelerate the date of exhaustion of the fund. While Medicare does face a shortfall, it is NOT going bankrupt. Absent any corrective action (again, not likely), when the Trust fund becomes exhausted projected to occur in 2024, its income from Medicare payroll taxes and other sources will meet 90 percent of its projected obligations without adding to the debt or the deficit. Note that Medicare Parts “B” and “D” are self sustaining due to automatic income adjustments.

Although Medicare expenditures are high, they “have grown more slowly than insurance premiums over the past 40 years”. "A private health insurance plan covering the standardized benefit would, CBO estimates, be more expensive currently than traditional Medicare. Both administrative costs (including profits) and payment rates to providers are higher for private plans than for Medicare." However, according to a recent study, 12% of medical professionals are currently refusing to accept private insurance due to administrative burden and inadequate reimbursement rates. The corresponding Medicare refusal rate is 7%.



We have all made mistakes. But Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the sins of the cold-blooded and the sins of the warm-hearted on different scales. Better the occasional faults of a party living in the spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a party frozen in the ice of its own indifference.
President John F. Kennedy

"It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners"
Albert Camus

True.

Conservatives are for the most part authoritarian, a consequence of their reactionaryism, their fear and disdain of change, diversity, and dissent – and their use of government to compel conformity, such as their hostility toward gay Americans and the privacy rights of women.
 
All of this stems from the flawed belief that the best way to pay for costly things is have a third party pay.

That and the even more flawed assumption that a program which costs well in excess of ten times what it was projected to cost when set in motion is a success.

Your authoritarian statist ship of foolishness seems to keep running aground. :lol:

While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians


You have 'flawed' propaganda from true authoritarians who reside on the right, not the left. Authoritarians kill people. Liberals protect people, especially the least among us.

Social Security and Medicare have not cost 'third parties' anything. They are social insurance programs. They are pay-go programs.

SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE

Social Security and Medicare have been prominent in the deficit and debt ceiling debate. Unfortunately, there is much misinformation and misunderstanding on how these programs work. Below are some key points to keep in mind about these important programs.

Social Security (SS) is NOT broke and despite claims to the contrary, Social Security does NOT contribute to the National debt or the deficit. By law, Social Security cannot borrow from the general fund and general funds cannot be appropriated for operational costs without changing the law. In 1983, to address the retirement of the baby boomers, President Reagan signed into law a bill raising the SS payroll tax and the retirement age.

The result is a $2.6 Trillion surplus in the SS trust fund held in the form of special issue Treasury notes – this means that SS actually loans money to the US Treasury. When SS expenses exceed SS income, Treasury notes are called and the Treasury must come up with the funds to cover the call, but this is NOT deficit spending. When Treasury notes are redeemed, the government debt to the SS trust is decreased, not increased. Even if no changes are made to SS taxes or benefits (unlikely), full benefits are still payable until 2036, after which 75% of benefits will still be paid without adding to the debt or the deficit.

Similarly, Medicare’s Hospital Insurance – Part “A” Trust Fund has a $272 Billion surplus in the form of special issue Treasury notes, but this Trust Fund is being exhausted at a more rapid rate than the SS Trust Fund. Two primary factors are driving Medicare expenditures to exceed income – increased enrollment and increased medical care expenses.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is moderating the increase in costs of medical care. However measured, the ACA brings about “sizable improvement in the financial outlook for Medicare compared to the law in effect prior to the Affordable Care Act”. If the ACA is repealed or defunded, the effect will drive up expenditures from the Medicare Trust Fund and accelerate the date of exhaustion of the fund. While Medicare does face a shortfall, it is NOT going bankrupt. Absent any corrective action (again, not likely), when the Trust fund becomes exhausted projected to occur in 2024, its income from Medicare payroll taxes and other sources will meet 90 percent of its projected obligations without adding to the debt or the deficit. Note that Medicare Parts “B” and “D” are self sustaining due to automatic income adjustments.

Although Medicare expenditures are high, they “have grown more slowly than insurance premiums over the past 40 years”. "A private health insurance plan covering the standardized benefit would, CBO estimates, be more expensive currently than traditional Medicare. Both administrative costs (including profits) and payment rates to providers are higher for private plans than for Medicare." However, according to a recent study, 12% of medical professionals are currently refusing to accept private insurance due to administrative burden and inadequate reimbursement rates. The corresponding Medicare refusal rate is 7%.



We have all made mistakes. But Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the sins of the cold-blooded and the sins of the warm-hearted on different scales. Better the occasional faults of a party living in the spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a party frozen in the ice of its own indifference.
President John F. Kennedy

"It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners"
Albert Camus

True.

Conservatives are for the most part authoritarian, a consequence of their reactionaryism, their fear and disdain of change, diversity, and dissent – and their use of government to compel conformity, such as their hostility toward gay Americans and the privacy rights of women.

Which is why I consider today's Democrats to be quite conservative. They're certainly not 'liberal'.
 
Yes, a mixed economy is partially state run. There are many thing the market handles best, but there are also many things the market never will handle even moderately well. Not everything in this world can be measured by profit margins. And it is always some group of humans that are not 'market' desirable who are left out.

The best example is health care and the elderly. Insurance companies don't want to insure the elderly. They are high risk, low reward customers. Before Medicare, the elderly were the most likely citizens to end up in poverty. Since Medicare was enacted the elderly are among the least likely to end up in financial ruin. And American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Insurance corporations are not in the health care business. they are in the profit business.

There are people employed by insurance companies whose sole job is to go over your health records with a fine tooth comb and find a loophole, a previous treatment for a mole, wart or something they can create a link to your current illness, and they get rewarded for finding and denying treatment.

THAT my naive friend is how a 'free market' works. Insurance companies are not in the healthcare business. They are in the PROFIT business. Denial of expensive treatments feed the bottom line.

Do you understand the keys to a market transaction? Do you understand the term 'leverage'? If one party in a market transaction has little or no leverage, it is NOT a free market. It is a captured market.

The whole basis of a 'free market' is the buyer has leverage, i.e. he/she can take his/her business elsewhere. That works perfectly fine when the stakes are 'things' (cars or TV sets etc). But a person's health is not a 'thing', and the consumer's stake is their very life. An unhappy consumer can go buys a different car or TV. If a person has a life threatening illness and is denied coverage for treatment, WHAT leverage does that person have...take their business elsewhere IN ANOTHER LIFE?

All of this stems from the flawed belief that the best way to pay for costly things is have a third party pay.

That and the even more flawed assumption that a program which costs well in excess of ten times what it was projected to cost when set in motion is a success.

Your authoritarian statist ship of foolishness seems to keep running aground. :lol:

While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians


You have 'flawed' propaganda from true authoritarians who reside on the right, not the left. Authoritarians kill people. Liberals protect people, especially the least among us.

Social Security and Medicare have not cost 'third parties' anything. They are social insurance programs. They are pay-go programs.

SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE

Social Security and Medicare have been prominent in the deficit and debt ceiling debate. Unfortunately, there is much misinformation and misunderstanding on how these programs work. Below are some key points to keep in mind about these important programs.

Social Security (SS) is NOT broke and despite claims to the contrary, Social Security does NOT contribute to the National debt or the deficit. By law, Social Security cannot borrow from the general fund and general funds cannot be appropriated for operational costs without changing the law. In 1983, to address the retirement of the baby boomers, President Reagan signed into law a bill raising the SS payroll tax and the retirement age.

The result is a $2.6 Trillion surplus in the SS trust fund held in the form of special issue Treasury notes – this means that SS actually loans money to the US Treasury. When SS expenses exceed SS income, Treasury notes are called and the Treasury must come up with the funds to cover the call, but this is NOT deficit spending. When Treasury notes are redeemed, the government debt to the SS trust is decreased, not increased. Even if no changes are made to SS taxes or benefits (unlikely), full benefits are still payable until 2036, after which 75% of benefits will still be paid without adding to the debt or the deficit.

Similarly, Medicare’s Hospital Insurance – Part “A” Trust Fund has a $272 Billion surplus in the form of special issue Treasury notes, but this Trust Fund is being exhausted at a more rapid rate than the SS Trust Fund. Two primary factors are driving Medicare expenditures to exceed income – increased enrollment and increased medical care expenses.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is moderating the increase in costs of medical care. However measured, the ACA brings about “sizable improvement in the financial outlook for Medicare compared to the law in effect prior to the Affordable Care Act”. If the ACA is repealed or defunded, the effect will drive up expenditures from the Medicare Trust Fund and accelerate the date of exhaustion of the fund. While Medicare does face a shortfall, it is NOT going bankrupt. Absent any corrective action (again, not likely), when the Trust fund becomes exhausted projected to occur in 2024, its income from Medicare payroll taxes and other sources will meet 90 percent of its projected obligations without adding to the debt or the deficit. Note that Medicare Parts “B” and “D” are self sustaining due to automatic income adjustments.

Although Medicare expenditures are high, they “have grown more slowly than insurance premiums over the past 40 years”. "A private health insurance plan covering the standardized benefit would, CBO estimates, be more expensive currently than traditional Medicare. Both administrative costs (including profits) and payment rates to providers are higher for private plans than for Medicare." However, according to a recent study, 12% of medical professionals are currently refusing to accept private insurance due to administrative burden and inadequate reimbursement rates. The corresponding Medicare refusal rate is 7%.



We have all made mistakes. But Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the sins of the cold-blooded and the sins of the warm-hearted on different scales. Better the occasional faults of a party living in the spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a party frozen in the ice of its own indifference.
President John F. Kennedy

"It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners"
Albert Camus
Trying to muddy the waters with text bricks does not work.

Your authoritarian welfare state is a money sucking failure, and you know it.
 
Yes, a mixed economy is partially state run. There are many thing the market handles best, but there are also many things the market never will handle even moderately well. Not everything in this world can be measured by profit margins. And it is always some group of humans that are not 'market' desirable who are left out.

The best example is health care and the elderly. Insurance companies don't want to insure the elderly. They are high risk, low reward customers. Before Medicare, the elderly were the most likely citizens to end up in poverty. Since Medicare was enacted the elderly are among the least likely to end up in financial ruin. And American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Insurance corporations are not in the health care business. they are in the profit business.

There are people employed by insurance companies whose sole job is to go over your health records with a fine tooth comb and find a loophole, a previous treatment for a mole, wart or something they can create a link to your current illness, and they get rewarded for finding and denying treatment.

THAT my naive friend is how a 'free market' works. Insurance companies are not in the healthcare business. They are in the PROFIT business. Denial of expensive treatments feed the bottom line.

Do you understand the keys to a market transaction? Do you understand the term 'leverage'? If one party in a market transaction has little or no leverage, it is NOT a free market. It is a captured market.

The whole basis of a 'free market' is the buyer has leverage, i.e. he/she can take his/her business elsewhere. That works perfectly fine when the stakes are 'things' (cars or TV sets etc). But a person's health is not a 'thing', and the consumer's stake is their very life. An unhappy consumer can go buys a different car or TV. If a person has a life threatening illness and is denied coverage for treatment, WHAT leverage does that person have...take their business elsewhere IN ANOTHER LIFE?

All of this stems from the flawed belief that the best way to pay for costly things is have a third party pay.

That and the even more flawed assumption that a program which costs well in excess of ten times what it was projected to cost when set in motion is a success.

Your authoritarian statist ship of foolishness seems to keep running aground. :lol:

While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians


You have 'flawed' propaganda from true authoritarians who reside on the right, not the left. Authoritarians kill people. Liberals protect people, especially the least among us.

Social Security and Medicare have not cost 'third parties' anything. They are social insurance programs. They are pay-go programs.

SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE

Social Security and Medicare have been prominent in the deficit and debt ceiling debate. Unfortunately, there is much misinformation and misunderstanding on how these programs work. Below are some key points to keep in mind about these important programs.

Social Security (SS) is NOT broke and despite claims to the contrary, Social Security does NOT contribute to the National debt or the deficit. By law, Social Security cannot borrow from the general fund and general funds cannot be appropriated for operational costs without changing the law. In 1983, to address the retirement of the baby boomers, President Reagan signed into law a bill raising the SS payroll tax and the retirement age.

The result is a $2.6 Trillion surplus in the SS trust fund held in the form of special issue Treasury notes – this means that SS actually loans money to the US Treasury. When SS expenses exceed SS income, Treasury notes are called and the Treasury must come up with the funds to cover the call, but this is NOT deficit spending. When Treasury notes are redeemed, the government debt to the SS trust is decreased, not increased. Even if no changes are made to SS taxes or benefits (unlikely), full benefits are still payable until 2036, after which 75% of benefits will still be paid without adding to the debt or the deficit.

Similarly, Medicare’s Hospital Insurance – Part “A” Trust Fund has a $272 Billion surplus in the form of special issue Treasury notes, but this Trust Fund is being exhausted at a more rapid rate than the SS Trust Fund. Two primary factors are driving Medicare expenditures to exceed income – increased enrollment and increased medical care expenses.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is moderating the increase in costs of medical care. However measured, the ACA brings about “sizable improvement in the financial outlook for Medicare compared to the law in effect prior to the Affordable Care Act”. If the ACA is repealed or defunded, the effect will drive up expenditures from the Medicare Trust Fund and accelerate the date of exhaustion of the fund. While Medicare does face a shortfall, it is NOT going bankrupt. Absent any corrective action (again, not likely), when the Trust fund becomes exhausted projected to occur in 2024, its income from Medicare payroll taxes and other sources will meet 90 percent of its projected obligations without adding to the debt or the deficit. Note that Medicare Parts “B” and “D” are self sustaining due to automatic income adjustments.

Although Medicare expenditures are high, they “have grown more slowly than insurance premiums over the past 40 years”. "A private health insurance plan covering the standardized benefit would, CBO estimates, be more expensive currently than traditional Medicare. Both administrative costs (including profits) and payment rates to providers are higher for private plans than for Medicare." However, according to a recent study, 12% of medical professionals are currently refusing to accept private insurance due to administrative burden and inadequate reimbursement rates. The corresponding Medicare refusal rate is 7%.



We have all made mistakes. But Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the sins of the cold-blooded and the sins of the warm-hearted on different scales. Better the occasional faults of a party living in the spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a party frozen in the ice of its own indifference.
President John F. Kennedy

"It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners"
Albert Camus
Bullshit. Obama alone shows you are talking out of your ass

Tapatalk
 
Yes, a mixed economy is partially state run. There are many thing the market handles best, but there are also many things the market never will handle even moderately well. Not everything in this world can be measured by profit margins. And it is always some group of humans that are not 'market' desirable who are left out.

The best example is health care and the elderly. Insurance companies don't want to insure the elderly. They are high risk, low reward customers. Before Medicare, the elderly were the most likely citizens to end up in poverty. Since Medicare was enacted the elderly are among the least likely to end up in financial ruin. And American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Insurance corporations are not in the health care business. they are in the profit business.

There are people employed by insurance companies whose sole job is to go over your health records with a fine tooth comb and find a loophole, a previous treatment for a mole, wart or something they can create a link to your current illness, and they get rewarded for finding and denying treatment.

THAT my naive friend is how a 'free market' works. Insurance companies are not in the healthcare business. They are in the PROFIT business. Denial of expensive treatments feed the bottom line.

Do you understand the keys to a market transaction? Do you understand the term 'leverage'? If one party in a market transaction has little or no leverage, it is NOT a free market. It is a captured market.

The whole basis of a 'free market' is the buyer has leverage, i.e. he/she can take his/her business elsewhere. That works perfectly fine when the stakes are 'things' (cars or TV sets etc). But a person's health is not a 'thing', and the consumer's stake is their very life. An unhappy consumer can go buys a different car or TV. If a person has a life threatening illness and is denied coverage for treatment, WHAT leverage does that person have...take their business elsewhere IN ANOTHER LIFE?

The best example is health care? Because insurance companies don't want to insure elderly people?

Can you cite actual examples to back up your argument, or are we just supposed to assume that, because you managed to be coherent enough to type, it must be true?

nopPUFh.png


By Samuel Metz, M.D.

Medicare assures health care for seniors who might otherwise find health care inaccessible. It saves our government money. It makes the lives of our seniors better.

Two concepts inspired Medicare. First, seniors require more care than younger Americans. Second, seniors usually live on less income; many survive only on Social Security. This combination renders seniors extremely vulnerable to losing their savings, homes or lives from easily treatable diseases.

And Medicare provides good care. American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Every industrialized nation guarantees health care for seniors. Indeed, we are unhappily distinctive in being the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee care for everyone else, as well. Medicare restores us to a civilized status.

Before Medicare, only 40 percent of nonworking seniors had health insurance, and of those with coverage, private insurance paid for less than 10 percent of their hospital bills. The principle of insuring only the healthy who consume little care and avoiding the sick has always driven our private insurance industry. No insurance company can make money by offering the same comprehensive, affordable coverage to seniors as Medicare, so they don't offer it. Our experience with Medicare Advantage, an effort to privatize parts of Medicare, resulted in our government spending $17 billion more for the same benefits available through Medicare. Our private insurance industry was in no hurry to insure seniors before Medicare started. They are in no hurry now. Medicare revolutionized health care access for seniors.

Why is Medicare expensive? Simply, health care for seniors will always cost more than that of healthier, younger Americans. And costs are rising in every health care system around the world, not just Medicare. The United States is doubly cursed because our costs are rising faster and are already twice as expensive as other countries. Though hard to believe, Medicare is a leader in fighting cost increases. Private insurance industry costs are rising nearly twice as fast as those of Medicare. And when it comes to administrative expenses, private insurance is 10 times higher than Medicare. In fact, if the single payer financing of Medicare were applied to citizens of all ages, we would save $350 billion annually, more than enough to provide comprehensive health care to every American.

Medicare is good for our seniors and good for our country. It provides health care far more affordably and efficiently than our private insurance industry. It saves our country hundreds of billions of dollars in administrative overhead. And if we expand Medicare to cover younger, healthier Americans, we would all get more care at less cost.

Medicare: Celebrate it, protect it, improve it, and expand it. We need more Medicare, not less.


Portland physician Samuel Metz is a member of Physicians for a National Health Program and a founding member of Mad As Hell Doctors.

So then, the answer is no.

Thanks.
 
All of this stems from the flawed belief that the best way to pay for costly things is have a third party pay.

That and the even more flawed assumption that a program which costs well in excess of ten times what it was projected to cost when set in motion is a success.

Your authoritarian statist ship of foolishness seems to keep running aground. :lol:

While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians


You have 'flawed' propaganda from true authoritarians who reside on the right, not the left. Authoritarians kill people. Liberals protect people, especially the least among us.

Social Security and Medicare have not cost 'third parties' anything. They are social insurance programs. They are pay-go programs.

SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE

Social Security and Medicare have been prominent in the deficit and debt ceiling debate. Unfortunately, there is much misinformation and misunderstanding on how these programs work. Below are some key points to keep in mind about these important programs.

Social Security (SS) is NOT broke and despite claims to the contrary, Social Security does NOT contribute to the National debt or the deficit. By law, Social Security cannot borrow from the general fund and general funds cannot be appropriated for operational costs without changing the law. In 1983, to address the retirement of the baby boomers, President Reagan signed into law a bill raising the SS payroll tax and the retirement age.

The result is a $2.6 Trillion surplus in the SS trust fund held in the form of special issue Treasury notes – this means that SS actually loans money to the US Treasury. When SS expenses exceed SS income, Treasury notes are called and the Treasury must come up with the funds to cover the call, but this is NOT deficit spending. When Treasury notes are redeemed, the government debt to the SS trust is decreased, not increased. Even if no changes are made to SS taxes or benefits (unlikely), full benefits are still payable until 2036, after which 75% of benefits will still be paid without adding to the debt or the deficit.

Similarly, Medicare’s Hospital Insurance – Part “A” Trust Fund has a $272 Billion surplus in the form of special issue Treasury notes, but this Trust Fund is being exhausted at a more rapid rate than the SS Trust Fund. Two primary factors are driving Medicare expenditures to exceed income – increased enrollment and increased medical care expenses.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is moderating the increase in costs of medical care. However measured, the ACA brings about “sizable improvement in the financial outlook for Medicare compared to the law in effect prior to the Affordable Care Act”. If the ACA is repealed or defunded, the effect will drive up expenditures from the Medicare Trust Fund and accelerate the date of exhaustion of the fund. While Medicare does face a shortfall, it is NOT going bankrupt. Absent any corrective action (again, not likely), when the Trust fund becomes exhausted projected to occur in 2024, its income from Medicare payroll taxes and other sources will meet 90 percent of its projected obligations without adding to the debt or the deficit. Note that Medicare Parts “B” and “D” are self sustaining due to automatic income adjustments.

Although Medicare expenditures are high, they “have grown more slowly than insurance premiums over the past 40 years”. "A private health insurance plan covering the standardized benefit would, CBO estimates, be more expensive currently than traditional Medicare. Both administrative costs (including profits) and payment rates to providers are higher for private plans than for Medicare." However, according to a recent study, 12% of medical professionals are currently refusing to accept private insurance due to administrative burden and inadequate reimbursement rates. The corresponding Medicare refusal rate is 7%.



We have all made mistakes. But Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the sins of the cold-blooded and the sins of the warm-hearted on different scales. Better the occasional faults of a party living in the spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a party frozen in the ice of its own indifference.
President John F. Kennedy

"It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners"
Albert Camus
Trying to muddy the waters with text bricks does not work.

Your authoritarian welfare state is a money sucking failure, and you know it.

FACTS don't muddy waters. They only muddy dogma and destroy ignorance.

Authoritarians harm people. Without Medicare, the elderly in this country would be severely harmed. You right wingers are the authoritarians. YOU would willfully destroy the elderly in this country over an extreme and anti-human ideology. There is not a single brain cell in a right wing mind that allows you folks to put yourself in another person's shoe. You are totally self absorbed.

Medicare is the greatest accomplishment in the history of this nation...BY FAR. Nothing government has done can come close to the success of Medicare.

47 MILLIONÂ…the number of Americans for whom Medicare provides comprehensive health care

51 PERCENTÂ…the number of Americans 65 or older who did not have health care before Medicare was passed, while today virtually all elderly Americans have health care thanks to Medicare

30 PERCENTÂ…the number of elderly Americans who lived in poverty before Medicare, a number now reduced to 7.5 PERCENT

72 PERCENT…the number of Americans in a recent poll who said that Medicare is “extremely” or “very” important to their retirement security

Medicare assures health care for seniors who might otherwise find health care inaccessible. It saves our government money. It makes the lives of our seniors better.

Two concepts inspired Medicare. First, seniors require more care than younger Americans. Second, seniors usually live on less income; many survive only on Social Security. This combination renders seniors extremely vulnerable to losing their savings, homes or lives from easily treatable diseases.

And Medicare provides good care. American life expectancy at birth ranks 30th in the world. We remain 30th for the rest of our lives -- until we reach 65. Then, our rank rises until we reach 14th at 80. We can thank the remarkable access to health care provided by Medicare.

Every industrialized nation guarantees health care for seniors. Indeed, we are unhappily distinctive in being the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee care for everyone else, as well. Medicare restores us to a civilized status.

Before Medicare, only 40 percent of nonworking seniors had health insurance, and of those with coverage, private insurance paid for less than 10 percent of their hospital bills. The principle of insuring only the healthy who consume little care and avoiding the sick has always driven our private insurance industry. No insurance company can make money by offering the same comprehensive, affordable coverage to seniors as Medicare, so they don't offer it. Our experience with Medicare Advantage, an effort to privatize parts of Medicare, resulted in our government spending $17 billion more for the same benefits available through Medicare. Our private insurance industry was in no hurry to insure seniors before Medicare started. They are in no hurry now. Medicare revolutionized health care access for seniors.

Why is Medicare expensive? Simply, health care for seniors will always cost more than that of healthier, younger Americans. And costs are rising in every health care system around the world, not just Medicare. The United States is doubly cursed because our costs are rising faster and are already twice as expensive as other countries. Though hard to believe, Medicare is a leader in fighting cost increases. Private insurance industry costs are rising nearly twice as fast as those of Medicare. And when it comes to administrative expenses, private insurance is 10 times higher than Medicare. In fact, if the single payer financing of Medicare were applied to citizens of all ages, we would save $350 billion annually, more than enough to provide comprehensive health care to every American.

Medicare is good for our seniors and good for our country. It provides health care far more affordably and efficiently than our private insurance industry. It saves our country hundreds of billions of dollars in administrative overhead. And if we expand Medicare to cover younger, healthier Americans, we would all get more care at less cost.

More
 
[

Medicare is good for our seniors and good for our country. It provides health care far more affordably and efficiently than our private insurance industry. It saves our country hundreds of billions of dollars in administrative overhead. And if we expand Medicare to cover younger, healthier Americans, we would all get more care at less cost.

Mr Dingle Berry, Sir

May I please ask some questions and can you respond to them as a good public and civic service?

1- Are private insurers able to order Fraulein Janet Yellen to inflate the fuck out of the currency? The US government can

2- Are private insurers allowed to send agents to steal loot seize property? The US government can'

3- Can private insurers a stop paying for benefits willy nilly? Federal government can.



3- so shut the fuck up , sell your laptop at a garage sale, go forth and sin no more

.
 
[

Medicare is good for our seniors and good for our country. It provides health care far more affordably and efficiently than our private insurance industry. It saves our country hundreds of billions of dollars in administrative overhead. And if we expand Medicare to cover younger, healthier Americans, we would all get more care at less cost.

Mr Dingle Berry, Sir

May I please ask some questions and can you respond to them as a good public and civic service?

1- Are private insurers able to order Fraulein Janet Yellen to inflate the fuck out of the currency? The US government can

2- Are private insurers allowed to send agents to steal loot seize property? The US government can'

3- Can private insurers a stop paying for benefits willy nilly? Federal government can.



3- so shut the fuck up , sell your laptop at a garage sale, go forth and sin no more

.

Gee, maybe I can join your group?

Contumacious and cohorts...


bD437.jpg


The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain.
Thomas Jefferson - Letter to Larkin Smith (1809).
 
Back
Top Bottom