Obama has increased government spending less than any president in at least a generation.

[LoneLaugher]

Nutters are very find of pretending that liberals don't know the difference between the deficit and the debt. That's silly of course.

What isn't silly....is that nutters don't know the relationship between the two.

Obama will have added more to the deficit than all other Presidents combined. That is the only fact that matters.

Brilliant!

Adding to the deficit Bush vs. Obama - The Washington Post

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

That is a total crock of shit, statistics lie and liars use statistics. The national debt when he took office was 10 trillion, it took 43 presidents more than 200 years to run that up, your dear leader is on pace to double that in 8 years, so it is ludicrous to say he's spending less.

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

 

[Kosh]

Nutters are very find of pretending that liberals don't know the difference between the deficit and the debt. That's silly of course.

What isn't silly....is that nutters don't know the relationship between the two.

Obama will have added more to the deficit than all other Presidents combined. That is the only fact that matters.

Brilliant!

Adding to the deficit Bush vs. Obama - The Washington Post

Anything includes "Tax cuts" in their analysis is not be taken seriously since the biggest tax cut came under a Conservative Democrat known as JFK.

But leave it to the far left drones to try and attribute those to the Bush years and not to Obama's years when he extended them..

 

[Kosh]

That is a total crock of shit, statistics lie and liars use statistics. The national debt when he took office was 10 trillion, it took 43 presidents more than 200 years to run that up, your dear leader is on pace to double that in 8 years, so it is ludicrous to say he's spending less.

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

Wrong! it is from many sources, but why believe the CBO on this when you support Obamacare and the trillions that will be spent to still have 30 million people without insurance.

Typical far left drone..

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

That is a total crock of shit, statistics lie and liars use statistics. The national debt when he took office was 10 trillion, it took 43 presidents more than 200 years to run that up, your dear leader is on pace to double that in 8 years, so it is ludicrous to say he's spending less.

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

Wrong! it is from many sources, but why believe the CBO on this when you support Obamacare and the trillions that will be spent to still have 30 million people without insurance.

Typical far left drone..

Listen goober pause a second in your brilliant use of "left drone": and look at the lower Right hand corner of the graph...there the source of the data is identified...what is your source "Breitbart" ? ...by the way there is drool on your chin Einstein...

 

[Kosh]

That is a total crock of shit, statistics lie and liars use statistics. The national debt when he took office was 10 trillion, it took 43 presidents more than 200 years to run that up, your dear leader is on pace to double that in 8 years, so it is ludicrous to say he's spending less.

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

Wrong! it is from many sources, but why believe the CBO on this when you support Obamacare and the trillions that will be spent to still have 30 million people without insurance.

Typical far left drone..

Listen goober pause a second in your brilliant use of "left drone": and look at the lower Right hand corner of the graph...there the source of the data is identified...what is your source "Breitbart" ? ...by the way there is drool on your chin Einstein...

Typical far left drone.

Believes the CBO on one thing as it fits their programmed narrative and then ignores the CBO when it goes against their Messiah.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

That is a total crock of shit, statistics lie and liars use statistics. The national debt when he took office was 10 trillion, it took 43 presidents more than 200 years to run that up, your dear leader is on pace to double that in 8 years, so it is ludicrous to say he's spending less.

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

Wrong! it is from many sources, but why believe the CBO on this when you support Obamacare and the trillions that will be spent to still have 30 million people without insurance.

Typical far left drone..

Listen goober pause a second in your brilliant use of "left drone": and look at the lower Right hand corner of the graph...there the source of the data is identified...what is your source "Breitbart" ? ...by the way there is drool on your chin Einstein...

Typical far left drone.

Believes the CBO on one thing as it fits their programmed narrative and then ignores the CBO when it goes against their Messiah.

do you have any source any information any link of any kind or are you fascinated by your clever use of "left drone" Einstein ?..... you are just another Blow hard no information right wing laughing stock repeating meme s...

 

[Kosh]

That is a total crock of shit, statistics lie and liars use statistics. The national debt when he took office was 10 trillion, it took 43 presidents more than 200 years to run that up, your dear leader is on pace to double that in 8 years, so it is ludicrous to say he's spending less.

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

Wrong! it is from many sources, but why believe the CBO on this when you support Obamacare and the trillions that will be spent to still have 30 million people without insurance.

Typical far left drone..

Listen goober pause a second in your brilliant use of "left drone": and look at the lower Right hand corner of the graph...there the source of the data is identified...what is your source "Breitbart" ? ...by the way there is drool on your chin Einstein...

Typical far left drone.

Believes the CBO on one thing as it fits their programmed narrative and then ignores the CBO when it goes against their Messiah.

do you have any source any information any link of any kind or are you fascinated by your clever use of "left drone" Einstein ?..... you are just another Blow hard no information right wing laughing stock repeating meme s...

See the irony impaired far left drone (that supports Obama's illegal wars) believes the CBO here, but ignores the CBO when it comes to Obamacare.

Typical far left drone..

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

Wrong! it is from many sources, but why believe the CBO on this when you support Obamacare and the trillions that will be spent to still have 30 million people without insurance.

Typical far left drone..

Listen goober pause a second in your brilliant use of "left drone": and look at the lower Right hand corner of the graph...there the source of the data is identified...what is your source "Breitbart" ? ...by the way there is drool on your chin Einstein...

Typical far left drone.

Believes the CBO on one thing as it fits their programmed narrative and then ignores the CBO when it goes against their Messiah.

do you have any source any information any link of any kind or are you fascinated by your clever use of "left drone" Einstein ?..... you are just another Blow hard no information right wing laughing stock repeating meme s...

See the irony impaired far left drone (that supports Obama's illegal wars) believes the CBO here, but ignores the CBO when it comes to Obamacare.

Typical far left drone..

you have nothing to counter what I posted so you have two strategies

change the subject to claims about Obamacare...

and of course the brilliant "left drone" ...you have it going on there Einstein...I am laughing at you....you are struggling....

 

[Kosh]

Wrong! it is from many sources, but why believe the CBO on this when you support Obamacare and the trillions that will be spent to still have 30 million people without insurance.

Typical far left drone..

Listen goober pause a second in your brilliant use of "left drone": and look at the lower Right hand corner of the graph...there the source of the data is identified...what is your source "Breitbart" ? ...by the way there is drool on your chin Einstein...

Typical far left drone.

Believes the CBO on one thing as it fits their programmed narrative and then ignores the CBO when it goes against their Messiah.

do you have any source any information any link of any kind or are you fascinated by your clever use of "left drone" Einstein ?..... you are just another Blow hard no information right wing laughing stock repeating meme s...

See the irony impaired far left drone (that supports Obama's illegal wars) believes the CBO here, but ignores the CBO when it comes to Obamacare.

Typical far left drone..

you have nothing to counter what I posted so you have two strategies

change the subject to claims about Obamacare...

and of course the brilliant "left drone" ...you have it going on there Einstein...I am laughing at you....you are struggling....

Just point out that the far left drone uses the CBO in this case, but ignores it when it comes to anything that speaks bad of the messiah.

So did you believe the CBO when it showed that Obamacare was not really going to fix any problems except spend trillions of dollars?

See how the far left drones want it to be a valid source here, but not when it runs up against their programmed narrative. Especially as they support Obama's illegal wars.

So if the CBO is a valid source now then it should be when it says that we sill spend trillions on Obamacare that will not really do any good. Or did the far left drone not understand the word Trillions?

Of Couse you truly do not understand the source that you posted, it just fit the programmed narrative..

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Listen goober pause a second in your brilliant use of "left drone": and look at the lower Right hand corner of the graph...there the source of the data is identified...what is your source "Breitbart" ? ...by the way there is drool on your chin Einstein...

Typical far left drone.

Believes the CBO on one thing as it fits their programmed narrative and then ignores the CBO when it goes against their Messiah.

do you have any source any information any link of any kind or are you fascinated by your clever use of "left drone" Einstein ?..... you are just another Blow hard no information right wing laughing stock repeating meme s...

See the irony impaired far left drone (that supports Obama's illegal wars) believes the CBO here, but ignores the CBO when it comes to Obamacare.

Typical far left drone..

you have nothing to counter what I posted so you have two strategies

change the subject to claims about Obamacare...

and of course the brilliant "left drone" ...you have it going on there Einstein...I am laughing at you....you are struggling....

Just point out that the far left drone uses the CBO in this case, but ignores it when it comes to anything that speaks bad of the messiah.

So did you believe the CBO when it showed that Obamacare was not really going to fix any problems except spend trillions of dollars?

See how the far left drones want it to be a valid source here, but not when it runs up against their programmed narrative. Especially as they support Obama's illegal wars.

So if the CBO is a valid source now then it should be when it says that we sill spend trillions on Obamacare that will not really do any good. Or did the far left drone not understand the word Trillions?

Of Couse you truly do not understand the source that you posted, it just fit the programmed narrative..

I understand that you are a low information no information right wing nut bag repeating meme s no sources no nothing ...

 

[Kosh]

Typical far left drone.

Believes the CBO on one thing as it fits their programmed narrative and then ignores the CBO when it goes against their Messiah.

do you have any source any information any link of any kind or are you fascinated by your clever use of "left drone" Einstein ?..... you are just another Blow hard no information right wing laughing stock repeating meme s...

See the irony impaired far left drone (that supports Obama's illegal wars) believes the CBO here, but ignores the CBO when it comes to Obamacare.

Typical far left drone..

you have nothing to counter what I posted so you have two strategies

change the subject to claims about Obamacare...

and of course the brilliant "left drone" ...you have it going on there Einstein...I am laughing at you....you are struggling....

Just point out that the far left drone uses the CBO in this case, but ignores it when it comes to anything that speaks bad of the messiah.

So did you believe the CBO when it showed that Obamacare was not really going to fix any problems except spend trillions of dollars?

See how the far left drones want it to be a valid source here, but not when it runs up against their programmed narrative. Especially as they support Obama's illegal wars.

So if the CBO is a valid source now then it should be when it says that we sill spend trillions on Obamacare that will not really do any good. Or did the far left drone not understand the word Trillions?

Of Couse you truly do not understand the source that you posted, it just fit the programmed narrative..

I understand that you are a low information no information right wing nut bag repeating meme s no sources no nothing ...

Yes the far left drones show that the CBO is only valid prior to 2009..

 

[healthmyths]

Different parties spew different rhetoric. In my opinion, the outcomes are scripted. Politicians are just bad B grade actors cavorting on a stage. It's like pro wrestling where someone Hulk Hogan wins and Andre the Giant loses, but the outcome is scripted and they both get paid by McMahon at the end of the day.

You can quote a politician saying he wanted this or he wanted that. Reagan said in his speeches he wanted Congress to reduce spending, giving partisan Reps ammo to blame Dems.

The system is set up for deficits to continue, to build One Nation Under Surveillance, and for endless war. The differences in the parties are purely rhetorical and cosmetic.

I agree with a lot of the points you've been making, but I don't think it's at all accurate to say that the two parties are equivalent, or that their public scuffles are mere kabuki theater. I hear this a lot from people who dislike politics in general - engineers, often enough, for instance. And yeah, a lot of it is pretty cynical. But if Republicans had had more control over Congress in the last half-decade, we certainly would not have the Affordable Care Act, which is a pretty substantial policy difference.

Sure, those trends you've noted are real, but it's the deficit will continue, because as you noted there is swell of Baby Boomers retiring. That's not exactly something the system could engineer on its own. I'm not saying that there ISN'T a lot of shadow-puppetry going on in politics (it's something opponents of a political party can point out endlessly), but that doesn't mean those parties aren't working toward opposite goals.

@Paperman ,

You mention the ACA, that it wouldn't exist without a Democratic majority.

Let me attempt to respond.

First of all, our system is set up in a way, sort of like the ebb and flow of the tides, that Dems come into power cyclically. They come in and go out with the political tides.

So, Dems come into power and none of them (except Kucinich, briefly) champion single payer or the public option. Obama never gives one of his rousing speeches about single-payer or a public insurance option. The patent excuse is given... "We'd never get the votes for that." Whatever you think about single-payer or a public option, hate that or love it, at least they logistically have a chance to lower the cost of healthcare.

Instead, we get the ACA. The Republican minority sees Gruber's writing on the wall, and they can save face by not voting for it, knowing that it will pass anyway. No harm done to their insurance-lobby backers.

Now, Republicans are beginning to get on board with the ACA (ie Gov Kasich of Ohio), if not in words then in actions. And, we're stuck with a program that does nothing to reduce the cost of healthcare. What it does is work to get everyone on insurance (having insurance is not necessarily having good healthcare). Subsidies are paid from the government, with money created by debt. Where does that money go? Straight to the insurance industry which supports the campaigns of both parties. You see the racket? This is a tennis game between government and an industry that finances elections.

When the FED 'buys' bonds from the Treasury, it receives securities from one of its member banks. In turn, it electronically creates an inflated balance in that member bank, and that new money goes to the Treasury. Now that money can be used to pay for subsidies, errr, be given to the insurance industry. So, the created money really doesn't enter a wide circulation , which would cause massive inflation. It stays in a tight circle of elites.

First of all, when Democrats say the political will for single-payer isn't there, they are absolutely correct. I don't really feel I need to expand on this, but we can go that direction if you want.

Secondly, you're essentially suggesting that the health insurance industry secretly supported the ACA, believing it would increase their profits. While I can't definitively prove what the health insurance industry collectively wanted, I think you'd agree that how they spent their money is a pretty good indicator. Over about 15 months around 2009, the biggest health insurance lobbying group in the country spent over $100 million trying to defeat the ACA. From Exclusive AHIP Gave More Than 100 Million to Chamber s Efforts to Derail Health Care Reform - NationalJournal.com

The nation's leading health insurance industry group gave more than $100 million to help fuel the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's 2009 and 2010 efforts to defeat President Obama's signature health care reform law, National Journal's Influence Alley has learned.

During the final push to kill the bill before its March 2010 passage, America's Health Insurance Plans gave the chamber $16.2 million. With the $86.2 million the insurers funneled to the business lobbying powerhouse in 2009, AHIP sent the chamber a total of $102.4 million during the health care reform debate, a number that has not been reported before now.

The backchannel spending allowed insurers to publicly stake out a pro-reform position while privately funding the leading anti-reform lobbying group in Washington. The chamber spent tens of millions of dollars bankrolling efforts to kill health care reform.

The Chamber of Commerce, I'll add, is group whose aims generally align with (/influence) the aims of the Republican party. The fight over healthcare reform was not playacting.

As an aside, I want to make clear I'm not making an argument that America under a Democratic Congress is not a completely different country than an America under a Republican Congress. Generally, the realistic goals of each party are basically politically moderate (despite rhetoric to the contrary).

Health insurance companies base premiums on claims! That's it!
So how do we reduce the amount of claims?
A) 90% of physicians agree that $850 billion a year is spent on duplicate tests,etc. i.e. defensive medicine!
Proof tort reform works is the Federal Tort Claims Act of 1946 because while 90% of non-federal contracted physicians say they practice
defensive medicine less the 48% of Federally contracted physicians said they do! Why? because they are protected by the 1946 ACT!
I always provide the source: SOURCE: http://www.jacksonhealthcare.com/media/8968/defensivemedicine_ebook_final.pdf
B) EMTALA
1986 EMTALA...Enacted by the federal government in 1986, requires that hospital emergency departments treat emergency conditions of all patients regardless of their ability to pay and is considered a critical element in the "safety net" for the uninsured, but established no direct payment mechanism for such care. Indirect payments and reimbursements through federal and state government programs have never fully compensated public and private hospitals for the full cost of care mandated by EMTALA. [/I]Health care in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
As a result we have hospitals recouping their costs as this CEO admits:
A hospital CEO when asked: "How do hospitals deal with the cost of the uninsured?
Like any business, we pass it on to the paying customers.
From PAGE 1 of this document: http://www.ncmedicaljournal.com/wp-content/uploads/NCMJ/mar-apr-05/Yarbrough.pdf
C) Idiocy of the American public bent on skateboarding,rock climbing, etc. any of these sports that have caused injuries that have caused medical services that cause CLAIMS! Billions of dollars paid out by insurance claims for stupid idiotic behavior and as a result higher claims means higher premiums!

Who pays for these idiots? Insurance companies! Who jacks up premiums because of claims filed by these idiots? Insurance companies!
And it's not just skateboarders!
View attachment 36426
Rock climbing!!!
View attachment 36427
Snowmobiles accidents... again this is just stupidity on the part of people that have too much time on their hands!
View attachment 36428

treeshepherd and I were actually talking about whether we see substantial policy differences in government depending on what political party is in power, and using the ACA as an example, not...health insurance rates, I guess is what this is about?

Whatever it is, I actually don't see anything I would really disagree with too much here. I agree healthcare for the uninsured is driving up costs to paying patients, but what's your solution? Repeal EMTALA? Outlaw extreme sports? Or are you making an argument in favor of the individual mandate?

A) Take a page from ACA! Tanning salons taxed 10% because tanning causes cancer which cause treatments which cause claims!
OK...
Tax lawyers 10% of the $270 billion they make and tie it to the reduction of the $850 billion that the tort reform would AS the 1946 Federal Tort Reforms Act proved in reducing defensive medicine! I'm not saying this the physicians are! 90% of NON-federally contracted physicians say they fear
lawsuits they do duplicate testing, referrals to specialists...all that add up to $850 billion a year in defensive medicine!
B) Bring back "pre-existing conditions" restrictions. Want to do stupid sports skateboarding,etc. PAY higher insurance premiums!
C) Create the Uninsured Health Insurance Co. with the $27 billion from taxes and pay the $5,000 premium per each of the 4 million truly uninsured!

 

[healthmyths]

That is a total crock of shit, statistics lie and liars use statistics. The national debt when he took office was 10 trillion, it took 43 presidents more than 200 years to run that up, your dear leader is on pace to double that in 8 years, so it is ludicrous to say he's spending less.

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

Wrong! it is from many sources, but why believe the CBO on this when you support Obamacare and the trillions that will be spent to still have 30 million people without insurance.

Typical far left drone..

PLEASE don't continue to foster that stupid "30 million" number!
10 million were not citizens that Obama agreed AFTER ACA passed and he used 46 million to get ACA passed.
14 million were already eligible for Medicaid/SCHIP BEFORE ACA and so that brought number down to 22 million!
18 million DON"T WANT. DON"T NEED. They make over $50,000 but spend less then the cost of their employers health plan!
WHY are they counted when they never wanted or needed???
That leaves less then 4 million! 4 million that could have a $5,000 premium per person paid by taxing lawyers 10% of their $270 billion income!
Reducing the 10% tax as the $850 billion a year reduces that is CAUSED by lawyers suing physicians! It is proven that physicians practice defensive medicine and who in the hell pays the claims for this defensive medicine? Insurance companies who jack up the premiums to cover this cost!
Evidently MOST people don't know state insurance regulators REGULATE Premiums based on a real measure called Medical liability ratio!
If claim costs go down, i.e. fewer defensive medicine claims filed, costs go down. Costs go down premiums go down!
THAT f...king simple!
Tax lawyers 10%! $850 billion defensive medicine costs go down. Costs go down. Premiums go down!
THAT simple!

 

[OKTexas]

That is a total crock of shit, statistics lie and liars use statistics. The national debt when he took office was 10 trillion, it took 43 presidents more than 200 years to run that up, your dear leader is on pace to double that in 8 years, so it is ludicrous to say he's spending less.

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

Reality, are you saying he's not on pace to double the debt in 8 years?

 

[healthmyths]

Different parties spew different rhetoric. In my opinion, the outcomes are scripted. Politicians are just bad B grade actors cavorting on a stage. It's like pro wrestling where someone Hulk Hogan wins and Andre the Giant loses, but the outcome is scripted and they both get paid by McMahon at the end of the day.

You can quote a politician saying he wanted this or he wanted that. Reagan said in his speeches he wanted Congress to reduce spending, giving partisan Reps ammo to blame Dems.

The system is set up for deficits to continue, to build One Nation Under Surveillance, and for endless war. The differences in the parties are purely rhetorical and cosmetic.

I agree with a lot of the points you've been making, but I don't think it's at all accurate to say that the two parties are equivalent, or that their public scuffles are mere kabuki theater. I hear this a lot from people who dislike politics in general - engineers, often enough, for instance. And yeah, a lot of it is pretty cynical. But if Republicans had had more control over Congress in the last half-decade, we certainly would not have the Affordable Care Act, which is a pretty substantial policy difference.

Sure, those trends you've noted are real, but it's the deficit will continue, because as you noted there is swell of Baby Boomers retiring. That's not exactly something the system could engineer on its own. I'm not saying that there ISN'T a lot of shadow-puppetry going on in politics (it's something opponents of a political party can point out endlessly), but that doesn't mean those parties aren't working toward opposite goals.

@Paperman ,

You mention the ACA, that it wouldn't exist without a Democratic majority.

Let me attempt to respond.

First of all, our system is set up in a way, sort of like the ebb and flow of the tides, that Dems come into power cyclically. They come in and go out with the political tides.

So, Dems come into power and none of them (except Kucinich, briefly) champion single payer or the public option. Obama never gives one of his rousing speeches about single-payer or a public insurance option. The patent excuse is given... "We'd never get the votes for that." Whatever you think about single-payer or a public option, hate that or love it, at least they logistically have a chance to lower the cost of healthcare.

Instead, we get the ACA. The Republican minority sees Gruber's writing on the wall, and they can save face by not voting for it, knowing that it will pass anyway. No harm done to their insurance-lobby backers.

Now, Republicans are beginning to get on board with the ACA (ie Gov Kasich of Ohio), if not in words then in actions. And, we're stuck with a program that does nothing to reduce the cost of healthcare. What it does is work to get everyone on insurance (having insurance is not necessarily having good healthcare). Subsidies are paid from the government, with money created by debt. Where does that money go? Straight to the insurance industry which supports the campaigns of both parties. You see the racket? This is a tennis game between government and an industry that finances elections.

When the FED 'buys' bonds from the Treasury, it receives securities from one of its member banks. In turn, it electronically creates an inflated balance in that member bank, and that new money goes to the Treasury. Now that money can be used to pay for subsidies, errr, be given to the insurance industry. So, the created money really doesn't enter a wide circulation , which would cause massive inflation. It stays in a tight circle of elites.

First of all, when Democrats say the political will for single-payer isn't there, they are absolutely correct. I don't really feel I need to expand on this, but we can go that direction if you want.

Secondly, you're essentially suggesting that the health insurance industry secretly supported the ACA, believing it would increase their profits. While I can't definitively prove what the health insurance industry collectively wanted, I think you'd agree that how they spent their money is a pretty good indicator. Over about 15 months around 2009, the biggest health insurance lobbying group in the country spent over $100 million trying to defeat the ACA. From Exclusive AHIP Gave More Than 100 Million to Chamber s Efforts to Derail Health Care Reform - NationalJournal.com

The nation's leading health insurance industry group gave more than $100 million to help fuel the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's 2009 and 2010 efforts to defeat President Obama's signature health care reform law, National Journal's Influence Alley has learned.

During the final push to kill the bill before its March 2010 passage, America's Health Insurance Plans gave the chamber $16.2 million. With the $86.2 million the insurers funneled to the business lobbying powerhouse in 2009, AHIP sent the chamber a total of $102.4 million during the health care reform debate, a number that has not been reported before now.

The backchannel spending allowed insurers to publicly stake out a pro-reform position while privately funding the leading anti-reform lobbying group in Washington. The chamber spent tens of millions of dollars bankrolling efforts to kill health care reform.

The Chamber of Commerce, I'll add, is group whose aims generally align with (/influence) the aims of the Republican party. The fight over healthcare reform was not playacting.

As an aside, I want to make clear I'm not making an argument that America under a Democratic Congress is not a completely different country than an America under a Republican Congress. Generally, the realistic goals of each party are basically politically moderate (despite rhetoric to the contrary).

Health insurance companies base premiums on claims! That's it!
So how do we reduce the amount of claims?
A) 90% of physicians agree that $850 billion a year is spent on duplicate tests,etc. i.e. defensive medicine!
Proof tort reform works is the Federal Tort Claims Act of 1946 because while 90% of non-federal contracted physicians say they practice
defensive medicine less the 48% of Federally contracted physicians said they do! Why? because they are protected by the 1946 ACT!
I always provide the source: SOURCE: http://www.jacksonhealthcare.com/media/8968/defensivemedicine_ebook_final.pdf
B) EMTALA
1986 EMTALA...Enacted by the federal government in 1986, requires that hospital emergency departments treat emergency conditions of all patients regardless of their ability to pay and is considered a critical element in the "safety net" for the uninsured, but established no direct payment mechanism for such care. Indirect payments and reimbursements through federal and state government programs have never fully compensated public and private hospitals for the full cost of care mandated by EMTALA. [/I]Health care in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
As a result we have hospitals recouping their costs as this CEO admits:
A hospital CEO when asked: "How do hospitals deal with the cost of the uninsured?
Like any business, we pass it on to the paying customers.
From PAGE 1 of this document: http://www.ncmedicaljournal.com/wp-content/uploads/NCMJ/mar-apr-05/Yarbrough.pdf
C) Idiocy of the American public bent on skateboarding,rock climbing, etc. any of these sports that have caused injuries that have caused medical services that cause CLAIMS! Billions of dollars paid out by insurance claims for stupid idiotic behavior and as a result higher claims means higher premiums!

Who pays for these idiots? Insurance companies! Who jacks up premiums because of claims filed by these idiots? Insurance companies!
And it's not just skateboarders!
View attachment 36426
Rock climbing!!!
View attachment 36427
Snowmobiles accidents... again this is just stupidity on the part of people that have too much time on their hands!
View attachment 36428

treeshepherd and I were actually talking about whether we see substantial policy differences in government depending on what political party is in power, and using the ACA as an example, not...health insurance rates, I guess is what this is about?

Whatever it is, I actually don't see anything I would really disagree with too much here. I agree healthcare for the uninsured is driving up costs to paying patients, but what's your solution? Repeal EMTALA? Outlaw extreme sports? Or are you making an argument in favor of the individual mandate?

Skateboarding can be a fun way for children and adolescents to get exercise.
However, an estimated 111,000 kids younger than 18 are treated in U.S. hospital emergency departments for skateboard-related injuries each year. Many of these injuries can be prevented.

Skateboarding Injury Facts

• Of those children treated in U.S. emergency departments because of their skateboard-related injuries:
  • The three most commonly injured body regions are the wrist, ankle and face.
  • Broken bones, sprains, scrapes and bruises are the most common injuries.

Injury Research and Policy Skateboarding Research Nationwide Children s Hospital Columbus Ohio
111,000 kids "TREATED" in hospitals and who pays the bills? Mostly insurance companies. What do the companies do? Raise the premiums!

"Faux rock-climbing"... again so much more time available to do stupid risky activities!

As more gyms along American highways offer faux rock-climbing experiences to would-be adventurers, more climbing injuries are turning up in American emergency rooms, researchers say.

The most common injuries are fractures, sprains, and strains that occur in the lower extremities -- particularly the foot and ankle -- according to Dr. Lara McKenzie, of the Center for Research Injury and Policy at Nationwide Children's Hospital in Columbus, Ohio.

She and colleagues reported their findings online in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.

Most of the injuries were caused by falls, McKenzie said, indicating that patients, who are typically restrained by a harness or who go bouldering (meaning to climb a little ways without a harness) land feet-first when they miss a climbing hold.

Although rock climbing was once regarded as an extreme sport, that perception is changing.

"There are a lot of people who are participating in rock climbing, and it's evolved from an extreme sport reserved for adrenaline junkies, to people who … are doing it recreationally," she observed.

In fact, indoor climbing facilities are becoming more common, and climbing walls are nearly ubiquitous on college campuses. About 9 million people go rock climbing every year, she said, even though the sport carries an inherent risk of falls and stress-related injuries.

To track changes in the number of injuries from the sport, the researchers conducted a retrospective analysis using data from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) for all ages from 1990 through 2007.

They found that 40,282 patients were treated in emergency departments for climbing-related injuries over the 18-year period. That amounts to 2,237 injuries annually – but the total increased by 63 percent over the study period.
Rock Climbing Climbing Wall Injuries Going Up - ABC News

 

[healthmyths]

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. (AP) - A St. Petersburg teenager is dead after hitting his head while skateboarding.
Police say 15-year-old Austin Demauro was holding on to the back of a Mercedes sedan when he let go, lost control of his skateboard and hit his head. The teen's 15-year-old friend was driving the car.

The Tampa Bay Times (http://bit.ly/1ldu1xi) reports bystanders performed CPR on the teen. He was taken to Bayfront Health St. Petersburg, where he was pronounced dead.

Police say the two teens had met up earlier Sunday at a skate park. The crash happened just before 6 p.m.

An investigation continues.



Read more: St. Pete Teen Dies in Skateboarding Crash 970 WFLA

 

[healthmyths]

So this kid killed was "holding on to the back of a car"!
EXCELLENT example of the "Survival of the Fittest" award for the year!
Don't you people understand this LACK of common sense is missing in our younger generation!
NOT one person should ever die from stupid actions like this because where were the parents teaching this kid?
YET our society gets all bent out of shape over a deflated football... the "redskins"... that we aren't eating the right foods!
MY goodness what have we done to our youth?

 

[WelfareQueen]

Nutters are very find of pretending that liberals don't know the difference between the deficit and the debt. That's silly of course.

What isn't silly....is that nutters don't know the relationship between the two.

Obama will have added more to the debt than all other Presidents combined. That is the only fact that matters.

Brilliant!

Adding to the deficit Bush vs. Obama - The Washington Post

What a crock of shit. The usual leftard propaganda. Bush tax cuts added to the deficit? Total bullshit. And btw....Obama extended those tax cuts!

The math is real simple. Debt when Obama took office. $10 trillion. Debt when Obama leaves office $20 Trillion. Even complete idiots should be able to compute math that simple.

 

[Redfish]

Nutters are very find of pretending that liberals don't know the difference between the deficit and the debt. That's silly of course.

What isn't silly....is that nutters don't know the relationship between the two.

Obama will have added more to the deficit than all other Presidents combined. That is the only fact that matters.

Brilliant!

Adding to the deficit Bush vs. Obama - The Washington Post

What a crock of shit. The usual leftard propaganda. Bush tax cuts added to the deficit? Total bullshit. And btw....Obama extended those tax cuts!

The math is real simple. Deficit when Obama took office. $10 trillion. Deficit when Obama leaves office $20 Trillion. Even complete idiots should be able to compute math that simple.

slight correction, thats debt, not deficit