Obamacare, the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act

[Oddball]

Thank you for once again demonstrating that you can't explain what you're talking about- most likely because you don't know what you're talking about

Thank you for once again demonstrating that the simplest of concepts - false dichotomies, self reliance, that there's no such thing as free lunch- go right over your head....That somehow appeals to emotion and claims of having the best of intentions (which I completely doubt) can paper over truly stupid and unworkable ideas.....But you're a leftist, so that's par for the course.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Thank you for once again demonstrating that you can't explain what you're talking about- most likely because you don't know what you're talking about

Thank you for once again demonstrating that the simplest of concepts - false dichotomies, self reliance, that there's no such thing as free lunch- go right over your head....That somehow appeals to emotion and claims of having the best of intentions (which I completely doubt) can paper over truly stupid and unworkable ideas.....But you're a leftist, so that's par for the course.

I'm still waiting to hear what you idea is for a rational, and just health care system that does not dole out medicine as a privilege for those who can pay for it while letting others die. Oh, right, you are heartless right wing nut who doesn't give a **** about anyone but yourself.

 

[Oddball]

I'm still waiting to hear what you idea is for a rational, and just health care system that does not dole out medicine as a privilege for those who can pay for it while letting others die. Oh, right, you are heartless right wing nut who doesn't give a **** about anyone but yourself.

"Rational and just" by whose estimation?...Who died and left you the arbiter of what's "reasonable and just"?

And just because I want The State the **** out of private business -ALL private business- that doesn't mean I want people to just "die in the streets"...That's an idiotic argument that unthinking knee-jerk fools invoke, to try to haughtily presume the moral high ground....You're making a sectarian (i.e. religious) argument, not one based in any kind of reasoned thought.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I'm still waiting to hear what you idea is for a rational, and just health care system that does not dole out medicine as a privilege for those who can pay for it while letting others die. Oh, right, you are heartless right wing nut who doesn't give a **** about anyone but yourself.

"Rational and just" by whose estimation?...Who died and left you the arbiter of what's "reasonable and just"?

And just because I want The State the **** out of private business -ALL private business- that doesn't mean I want people to just "die in the streets"...That's an idiotic argument that unthinking knee-jerk fools invoke, to try to haughtily presume the moral high ground....You're making a sectarian (i.e. religious) argument, not one based in any kind of reasoned thought.

Just more gibberish while dancing around the question of what exactly you believe should be done. How exactly will people be kept "from dying in the street" if health care is left entirely to the free, for profit market? Answer the damned question

 

[dblack]

How exactly will people be kept "from dying in the street" if health care is left entirely to the free, for profit market? Answer the damned question

There are lots of ways to try to keep people from dying in the streets. Use your imagination. But it's not a job for the government. The government is there to protect us from bullies, not "natural causes".

 

[Oddball]

Just more gibberish while dancing around the question of what exactly you believe should be done. How exactly will people be kept "from dying in the street" if health care is left entirely to the free, for profit market? Answer the damned question

It's only "dancing around the question" because the only answer you'll accept is a full-on takeover and monopoly run by The State.

People won't be left "dying in the street" (a leftist scare tactic completely detached from reality) if medical services are returned to the realm of the free market...All the recent problems with insane costs are directly traceable to the enacting of Medicare/Medicaid, which cost in excess of TEN TIMES (including inflation) what they were projected to cost when started fifty years ago...But then again, your only answer is to do more of what has demonstrably failed to deliver the goods, while demagoguing and demeaning anyone who dares to point out this failure, as though your claims of moral superiority can paper over the failures.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

It's only "dancing around the question" because the only answer you'll accept is a full-on takeover and monopoly run by The State.

That is actually complete inane equine excrement.

 

[Oddball]

That is actually complete inane equine excrement.

IOW, you have no argument.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Just more gibberish while dancing around the question of what exactly you believe should be done. How exactly will people be kept "from dying in the street" if health care is left entirely to the free, for profit market? Answer the damned question

It's only "dancing around the question" because the only answer you'll accept is a full-on takeover and monopoly run by The State.

People won't be left "dying in the street" (a leftist scare tactic completely detached from reality) if medical services are returned to the realm of the free market...All the recent problems with insane costs are directly traceable to the enacting of Medicare/Medicaid, which cost in excess of TEN TIMES (including inflation) what they were projected to cost when started fifty years ago...But then again, your only answer is to do more of what has demonstrably failed to deliver the goods, while demagoguing and demeaning anyone who dares to point out this failure, as though your claims of moral superiority can paper over the failures.

You quickly blame the government because you hate the government but that is dishonestly dumbing it down. There are many factors to consider

Obamacare, the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act

For instance.....greed and profit.....from the link

6. Our hospitals and other providers are increasingly gaining market share and are better able to demand higher prices.
While mergers or partnerships among medical providers or insurers may improve efficiency and help drive down prices, consolidation can also have the opposite effect, allowing near-monopolies in some markets and driving up prices, the report says. Increasingly, hospitals are buying up rivals and directly employing physicians, creating larger medical systems.

 

[Oddball]

You quickly blame the government because you hate the government but that is dishonestly dumbing it down. There are many factors to consider

Obamacare, the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act

For instance.....greed and profit.....from the link

6. Our hospitals and other providers are increasingly gaining market share and are better able to demand higher prices.
While mergers or partnerships among medical providers or insurers may improve efficiency and help drive down prices, consolidation can also have the opposite effect, allowing near-monopolies in some markets and driving up prices, the report says. Increasingly, hospitals are buying up rivals and directly employing physicians, creating larger medical systems.

I blame the gubmint because they could **** up a one-car parade...But then there's the reality of Medicare/Medicaid costing 10X projections, along with the unmitigated disaster that is the VA....All you have is one tiny claimed upside in an abortion of a program, that was lied into being and provided almost nothing of what it promised...I'm sensing a pattern here.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You quickly blame the government because you hate the government but that is dishonestly dumbing it down. There are many factors to consider

Obamacare, the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act

For instance.....greed and profit.....from the link

6. Our hospitals and other providers are increasingly gaining market share and are better able to demand higher prices.
While mergers or partnerships among medical providers or insurers may improve efficiency and help drive down prices, consolidation can also have the opposite effect, allowing near-monopolies in some markets and driving up prices, the report says. Increasingly, hospitals are buying up rivals and directly employing physicians, creating larger medical systems.

I blame the gubmint because they could **** up a one-car parade...But then there's the reality of Medicare/Medicaid costing 10X projections, along with the unmitigated disaster that is the VA....All you have is one tiny claimed upside in an abortion of a program, that was lied into being and provided almost nothing of what it promised...I'm sensing a pattern here.

I am sensing a pattern here You make a lot of bold and brash assertions that you fail to back up. You offer flowery rhetoric that lacks any modicum of substance. You prattle on about the alleged failings of government programs while ignoring the problems with free market health care that I have documented, and you repeatedly fail to offer any real and tangible solutions.

 

[Oddball]

I am sensing a pattern here You make a lot of bold and brash assertions that you fail to back up. You offer flowery rhetoric that lacks any modicum of substance. You prattle on about the alleged failings of government programs while ignoring the problems with free market health care that I have documented, and you repeatedly fail to offer any real and tangible solutions.

Talk about having no substance!!...There is no free market in medical services....It has been thoroughly polluted by gubmint buffoonery for no less than half a century...That you could try to frame it as market failure is laughable on its face.

And the horror stories we've heard about VA bureaucrats being so incompetent and greedy that vets were dying (in the streets?) because of it were just a fairy tale, right?

As for the Medicare/Medicaid debacle (which is broke BTW), and the "Medicare for all" pipe dream...

The cost of Medicare is a good place to begin. At its start, in 1966, Medicare cost $3 billion. The House Ways and Means Committee estimated that Medicare would cost only about $12 billion by 1990 (a figure that included an allowance for inflation). This was a supposedly "conservative" estimate. But in 1990 Medicare actually cost $107 billion.

This is a mere bagatelle compared with "conservative" projections for the next generation. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that Medicare will cost $223 billion by 1997. Constance Homer, deputy secretary of Health and Human Services, warns that "by the year 2003, at the current rates, we will be spending more on Medicare than we do on Social Security."

The Medicare Monster


Bernie Sanders' 'Medicare For All' Would Cost $32.6 Trillion, And It Gets Worse From There

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Candidates Who Voted To Repeal The Affordable Care Act Are In Trouble

Republicans may pay for having tried to reverse the health law.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I am sensing a pattern here You make a lot of bold and brash assertions that you fail to back up. You offer flowery rhetoric that lacks any modicum of substance. You prattle on about the alleged failings of government programs while ignoring the problems with free market health care that I have documented, and you repeatedly fail to offer any real and tangible solutions.

Talk about having no substance!!...There is no free market in medical services....It has been thoroughly polluted by gubmint buffoonery for no less than half a century...That you could try to frame it as market failure is laughable on its face.

And the horror stories we've heard about VA bureaucrats being so incompetent and greedy that vets were dying (in the streets?) because of it were just a fairy tale, right?

As for the Medicare/Medicaid debacle (which is broke BTW), and the "Medicare for all" pipe dream...

The cost of Medicare is a good place to begin. At its start, in 1966, Medicare cost $3 billion. The House Ways and Means Committee estimated that Medicare would cost only about $12 billion by 1990 (a figure that included an allowance for inflation). This was a supposedly "conservative" estimate. But in 1990 Medicare actually cost $107 billion.

This is a mere bagatelle compared with "conservative" projections for the next generation. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that Medicare will cost $223 billion by 1997. Constance Homer, deputy secretary of Health and Human Services, warns that "by the year 2003, at the current rates, we will be spending more on Medicare than we do on Social Security."

The Medicare Monster


Bernie Sanders' 'Medicare For All' Would Cost $32.6 Trillion, And It Gets Worse From There

There is another side to the Medicare story'

Medicare Is Not “Bankrupt”

Claims by some policymakers that the Medicare program is nearing “bankruptcy” are highly misleading. Although Medicare faces financing challenges, the program is not on the verge of bankruptcy or ceasing to operate. Such charges represent misunderstanding (or misrepresentation) of Medicare’s finances.

The 2018 report of Medicare’s trustees finds that Medicare’s Hospital Insurance (HI) trust fund will remain solvent — that is, able to pay 100 percent of the costs of the hospital insurance coverage that Medicare provides — through 2026. Even in 2026, when the HI trust fund is projected to be depleted, incoming payroll taxes and other revenue will still be sufficient to pay 91 percent of Medicare hospital insurance costs.[1] The share of costs covered by dedicated revenues will decline slowly to 78 percent in 2042 and then rise gradually to 85 percent in 2092. This shortfall will need to be closed through raising revenues, slowing the growth in costs, or most likely both. But the Medicare hospital insurance program will not run out of all financial resources and cease to operate after 2026, as the “bankruptcy” term may suggest.

And if you want to talk about what Medicare For All would cost, we also need to talk about what a nation of uninsured sick people would cost

 

[Oddball]

Candidates Who Voted To Repeal The Affordable Care Act Are In Trouble

Republicans may pay for having tried to reverse the health law.

Tissue?

 

[Oddball]

And if you want to talk about what Medicare For All would cost, we also need to talk about what a nation of uninsured sick people would cost

Neither false dichotomy nor gubmint solipotence are valid arguments.


* GOVERNMENT SOLIPOTENCE
The claim that if the government is not doing something about a problem,
then nothing CAN be done about it. ONLY the government can solve society's
problems.

Handbook of Fallacies