"Smaller government" advocates

[frigidweirdo]

Then again the times are changing AWAY from repressive policies, not towards

Four words: O ba ma care

Are you insane?

Insane? No, I support a health system which is basically funded out of money from the government, that's available for all, that has a lot less corruption than the US system.

People talk about smaller govt, yet the US spent the same amount on healthcare as the UK, even though Americans had to have private health insurance and the British don't.

I'm not saying Obamacare is great, the actual thing is rubbish, but it's a step in the right direction.

You're not insane, you just want a health system funded by government with low corruption. So in other word's you're not insane, you're completely, drooling nuts

Or, I'm someone who has experienced quite a few different health systems, and one of the worst is the one which isn't controlled by the government.

Not the worst, I've been in developing country health systems as well, not the best.

What do YOU know about the health systems in other countries exactly?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Then again the times are changing AWAY from repressive policies, not towards

Four words: O ba ma care

Are you insane?

Insane? No, I support a health system which is basically funded out of money from the government, that's available for all, that has a lot less corruption than the US system.

People talk about smaller govt, yet the US spent the same amount on healthcare as the UK, even though Americans had to have private health insurance and the British don't.

I'm not saying Obamacare is great, the actual thing is rubbish, but it's a step in the right direction.

It is, huh?

Well according to the Obama Care people, they signed up over 12 million Americans although that's been disputed and it's actually more around 10 million. That's 10 million more government dependents. How much of a larger government can you get than that?

You mean, you're pissed because 10 million people have HEALTHCARE? Are you ******* serious?

Yes, when government robs us, obviously we are OK with that. It's just that we don't want them to have the insurance. Are you ******* stupid?

So, it's better to be completely robbed blind by private companies then?

 

[kaz]

Four words: O ba ma care

Are you insane?

Insane? No, I support a health system which is basically funded out of money from the government, that's available for all, that has a lot less corruption than the US system.

People talk about smaller govt, yet the US spent the same amount on healthcare as the UK, even though Americans had to have private health insurance and the British don't.

I'm not saying Obamacare is great, the actual thing is rubbish, but it's a step in the right direction.

It is, huh?

Well according to the Obama Care people, they signed up over 12 million Americans although that's been disputed and it's actually more around 10 million. That's 10 million more government dependents. How much of a larger government can you get than that?

You mean, you're pissed because 10 million people have HEALTHCARE? Are you ******* serious?

When I'm paying for it, sure I'm pissed. When I lost my healthcare insurance so some french fry maker could have insurance instead, you bet I'm pissed.

More than that is Commie Care had nothing to do with everybody being insured, it had to do with making more government dependents which it successfully did. The more government dependents--the more likely Democrat voters.

Let's put it this with with your "Commie Care".

If you lived in the UK you'd be spending HALF what you spend in the US. You might not get a better service, but you'd get a very good service. A service that is good enough, and you'd get it if you were unemployed, you'd get it if you were employed, your kids would get it, you parents would get it no matter how old they are. You'd get it when you walked in the door, no questions asked, no worrying how much it would cost or if you're going to have problems.

Now, if the UK were to increase their spending by 50% they'd have an excellent service, less corruption, however they have a conservative govt which is intent on making friends by making a private system. To pay people through corruption and to make the poorer people have worse healthcare and pay more for the privilege. Things are already going downhill and they've been in for 5 years.

That's the difference between "Commie Care" and the private care or "Corrupt Care" as it should be known.

I know which I prefer, and I've lived under countries with private health, public health and not very much health care.

Nothing is so expensive as that which government provides for free

 

[kaz]

Then again the times are changing AWAY from repressive policies, not towards

Four words: O ba ma care

Are you insane?

Insane? No, I support a health system which is basically funded out of money from the government, that's available for all, that has a lot less corruption than the US system.

People talk about smaller govt, yet the US spent the same amount on healthcare as the UK, even though Americans had to have private health insurance and the British don't.

I'm not saying Obamacare is great, the actual thing is rubbish, but it's a step in the right direction.

You're not insane, you just want a health system funded by government with low corruption. So in other word's you're not insane, you're completely, drooling nuts

Or, I'm someone who has experienced quite a few different health systems, and one of the worst is the one which isn't controlled by the government.

Not the worst, I've been in developing country health systems as well, not the best.

What do YOU know about the health systems in other countries exactly?

I get that you like someone else paying your bills through their taxes rather than you when you receive services, that was always clear, Holmes

 

[kaz]

Four words: O ba ma care

Are you insane?

Insane? No, I support a health system which is basically funded out of money from the government, that's available for all, that has a lot less corruption than the US system.

People talk about smaller govt, yet the US spent the same amount on healthcare as the UK, even though Americans had to have private health insurance and the British don't.

I'm not saying Obamacare is great, the actual thing is rubbish, but it's a step in the right direction.

It is, huh?

Well according to the Obama Care people, they signed up over 12 million Americans although that's been disputed and it's actually more around 10 million. That's 10 million more government dependents. How much of a larger government can you get than that?

You mean, you're pissed because 10 million people have HEALTHCARE? Are you ******* serious?

Yes, when government robs us, obviously we are OK with that. It's just that we don't want them to have the insurance. Are you ******* stupid?

So, it's better to be completely robbed blind by private companies then?

Making shit up is a great way to argue. That's just vacuous crap

 

[frigidweirdo]

Insane? No, I support a health system which is basically funded out of money from the government, that's available for all, that has a lot less corruption than the US system.

People talk about smaller govt, yet the US spent the same amount on healthcare as the UK, even though Americans had to have private health insurance and the British don't.

I'm not saying Obamacare is great, the actual thing is rubbish, but it's a step in the right direction.

It is, huh?

Well according to the Obama Care people, they signed up over 12 million Americans although that's been disputed and it's actually more around 10 million. That's 10 million more government dependents. How much of a larger government can you get than that?

You mean, you're pissed because 10 million people have HEALTHCARE? Are you ******* serious?

When I'm paying for it, sure I'm pissed. When I lost my healthcare insurance so some french fry maker could have insurance instead, you bet I'm pissed.

More than that is Commie Care had nothing to do with everybody being insured, it had to do with making more government dependents which it successfully did. The more government dependents--the more likely Democrat voters.

Let's put it this with with your "Commie Care".

If you lived in the UK you'd be spending HALF what you spend in the US. You might not get a better service, but you'd get a very good service. A service that is good enough, and you'd get it if you were unemployed, you'd get it if you were employed, your kids would get it, you parents would get it no matter how old they are. You'd get it when you walked in the door, no questions asked, no worrying how much it would cost or if you're going to have problems.

Now, if the UK were to increase their spending by 50% they'd have an excellent service, less corruption, however they have a conservative govt which is intent on making friends by making a private system. To pay people through corruption and to make the poorer people have worse healthcare and pay more for the privilege. Things are already going downhill and they've been in for 5 years.

That's the difference between "Commie Care" and the private care or "Corrupt Care" as it should be known.

I know which I prefer, and I've lived under countries with private health, public health and not very much health care.

Nothing is so expensive as that which government provides for free

No, you're wrong.

The US system costs twice the percentage of GDP as the British system.

The US system sees about 30% go on corruption. Plus you have to add on the profits made by insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and other middle men who are completely unnecessary, and you're looking at about 45% or 50% just being wasted and not going on health at all, maybe more.

So, the UK govt can provide something for half the price, make it all inclusive at that, and do a better job than the private sector manages in the US.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Then again the times are changing AWAY from repressive policies, not towards

Four words: O ba ma care

Are you insane?

Insane? No, I support a health system which is basically funded out of money from the government, that's available for all, that has a lot less corruption than the US system.

People talk about smaller govt, yet the US spent the same amount on healthcare as the UK, even though Americans had to have private health insurance and the British don't.

I'm not saying Obamacare is great, the actual thing is rubbish, but it's a step in the right direction.

You're not insane, you just want a health system funded by government with low corruption. So in other word's you're not insane, you're completely, drooling nuts

Or, I'm someone who has experienced quite a few different health systems, and one of the worst is the one which isn't controlled by the government.

Not the worst, I've been in developing country health systems as well, not the best.

What do YOU know about the health systems in other countries exactly?

I get that you like someone else paying your bills through their taxes rather than you when you receive services, that was always clear, Holmes

Only, I pay taxes.

I have two choices.

I pay taxes, they go to the govt and then to the hospital.

Or I pay the insurance company, who take a slice, then give to the hospital, but only after a load of checks which require extra workers who also take a slice to prove that what happened to me was correct. Oh, and I might have to pay for more expensive drugs too, because there's no one to demand that I be given the cheaper drugs that do the same thing as the expensive drugs.

Which do I prefer.....???

Pay more for the same service or pay less.....? It's a no brainer really.

 

[kaz]

It is, huh?

Well according to the Obama Care people, they signed up over 12 million Americans although that's been disputed and it's actually more around 10 million. That's 10 million more government dependents. How much of a larger government can you get than that?

You mean, you're pissed because 10 million people have HEALTHCARE? Are you ******* serious?

When I'm paying for it, sure I'm pissed. When I lost my healthcare insurance so some french fry maker could have insurance instead, you bet I'm pissed.

More than that is Commie Care had nothing to do with everybody being insured, it had to do with making more government dependents which it successfully did. The more government dependents--the more likely Democrat voters.

Let's put it this with with your "Commie Care".

If you lived in the UK you'd be spending HALF what you spend in the US. You might not get a better service, but you'd get a very good service. A service that is good enough, and you'd get it if you were unemployed, you'd get it if you were employed, your kids would get it, you parents would get it no matter how old they are. You'd get it when you walked in the door, no questions asked, no worrying how much it would cost or if you're going to have problems.

Now, if the UK were to increase their spending by 50% they'd have an excellent service, less corruption, however they have a conservative govt which is intent on making friends by making a private system. To pay people through corruption and to make the poorer people have worse healthcare and pay more for the privilege. Things are already going downhill and they've been in for 5 years.

That's the difference between "Commie Care" and the private care or "Corrupt Care" as it should be known.

I know which I prefer, and I've lived under countries with private health, public health and not very much health care.

Nothing is so expensive as that which government provides for free

No, you're wrong.

The US system costs twice the percentage of GDP as the British system.

The US system sees about 30% go on corruption. Plus you have to add on the profits made by insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and other middle men who are completely unnecessary, and you're looking at about 45% or 50% just being wasted and not going on health at all, maybe more.

So, the UK govt can provide something for half the price, make it all inclusive at that, and do a better job than the private sector manages in the US.

The US healthcare system is already government controlled from beginning to end. The idea there is anything free market about our healthcare system is just ignorance. So the solution to government generated waste is government taking it over. Yeah....

 

[kaz]

Four words: O ba ma care

Are you insane?

Insane? No, I support a health system which is basically funded out of money from the government, that's available for all, that has a lot less corruption than the US system.

People talk about smaller govt, yet the US spent the same amount on healthcare as the UK, even though Americans had to have private health insurance and the British don't.

I'm not saying Obamacare is great, the actual thing is rubbish, but it's a step in the right direction.

You're not insane, you just want a health system funded by government with low corruption. So in other word's you're not insane, you're completely, drooling nuts

Or, I'm someone who has experienced quite a few different health systems, and one of the worst is the one which isn't controlled by the government.

Not the worst, I've been in developing country health systems as well, not the best.

What do YOU know about the health systems in other countries exactly?

I get that you like someone else paying your bills through their taxes rather than you when you receive services, that was always clear, Holmes

Only, I pay taxes.

I have two choices.

I pay taxes, they go to the govt and then to the hospital.

Or I pay the insurance company, who take a slice, then give to the hospital, but only after a load of checks which require extra workers who also take a slice to prove that what happened to me was correct. Oh, and I might have to pay for more expensive drugs too, because there's no one to demand that I be given the cheaper drugs that do the same thing as the expensive drugs.

Which do I prefer.....???

Pay more for the same service or pay less.....? It's a no brainer really.

Again, that you pay less by government owned healthcare is



To compare the US and UK and the costs as you are doing is just simplistic nonsense. The British who get good healthcare pay both for the government system and for private insurance or pay the costs directly. The UK healthcare provided is terrible

 

[frigidweirdo]

Insane? No, I support a health system which is basically funded out of money from the government, that's available for all, that has a lot less corruption than the US system.

People talk about smaller govt, yet the US spent the same amount on healthcare as the UK, even though Americans had to have private health insurance and the British don't.

I'm not saying Obamacare is great, the actual thing is rubbish, but it's a step in the right direction.

It is, huh?

Well according to the Obama Care people, they signed up over 12 million Americans although that's been disputed and it's actually more around 10 million. That's 10 million more government dependents. How much of a larger government can you get than that?

You mean, you're pissed because 10 million people have HEALTHCARE? Are you ******* serious?

Yes, when government robs us, obviously we are OK with that. It's just that we don't want them to have the insurance. Are you ******* stupid?

So, it's better to be completely robbed blind by private companies then?

Making shit up is a great way to argue. That's just vacuous crap

Is it crap?

The US Health Care System Is Fundamentally Flawed

"Overall, Americans also pay 50 percent more than other countries for identical drugs, as a result of laws and regulations preventing the US government from reining in drug prices like other nations do"

"While the US makes up only five percent of the world's population, Americans consume over 50 percent of all the world's pharmaceutical drugs"

So, why does it cost you twice as much for drugs as people in other countries? And why do Americans use half of all of those drugs? Are you seriously suggesting that this is good for your wallet?

"A review of US healthcare expenses by the Institutes of Medicine3 (IOM) revealed that 30 cents of every dollar spent on medical care is wasted, adding up to $750 billion annually. For perspective, the defense budget proposed by the Pentagon for 2014 was just under $527 billion."

30 cents of every dollar is WASTED.

Corruption, fraud and bureaucracy cost US healthcare system up to $272 billion annually

"Corruption, fraud and bureaucracy cost US healthcare system up to $272 billion annually"

"the U.S. loses as much as $272 billion annually due to things like medical embezzlement and insurance billing fraud, both of which are rampant."

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/mspar...lobal Report on Corruption--2006--pp16-22.pdf

"Despite the essentially invisible nature of the problem, health care fraud in the United States was deemed sufficiently serious by the Clinton administration (based on cases revealed) that in 1993, Attorney General Janet Reno declared it America’s ‘number two crime problem’, second only to violent crime."

"Under the fee-for-service structure, health care providers (doctors, hospitals, specialists, and so on) are trusted to determine the appropriate levels of care, and then trusted to bill the insurer for the services they perform."

"Most significant cases of corruption have involved medical professionals, providers and corporations in the health care delivery supply chain."

MMS: Error

"In 1999 U.S. private insurers retained $46.9 billion of the $401.2 billion they collected in premiums. "

"Their average overhead (11.7 percent) exceeded that of Medicare (3.6 percent) and Medicaid (6.8 percent). Overall, public and private insurance overhead totaled $72.0 billion — 5.9 percent of the total health care expenditures in the United States, or $259 per capita "

So, 6% of what is spent on healthcare goes to the profit of the insurance companies.

"The average U.S. hospital devoted 24.3 percent of spending to administration. "

So, of the money that makes it to the hospitals, 25% goes on administration, probably a lot of this administration is completely unnecessary and is needed to deal with the insurance companies in the first place.

"Hospital administration consumed $87.6 billion, or $315 per capita (Table 1). In Canada, hospital administration cost $3.1 billion — 12.9 percent of hospital spending, or $103 per capita."

This is THREE TIMES more than is spent in Canada. So we could assume that $60 billion is going on unnecessary administration.

So that's about $460 dollars per capita that goes on unnecessary admin and profit for insurance companies.



There's so much stuff going on, and for some reason, the people who complain the most about things costing too much are the ones who ignore how much more private health costs than public health in other countries.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You mean, you're pissed because 10 million people have HEALTHCARE? Are you ******* serious?

When I'm paying for it, sure I'm pissed. When I lost my healthcare insurance so some french fry maker could have insurance instead, you bet I'm pissed.

More than that is Commie Care had nothing to do with everybody being insured, it had to do with making more government dependents which it successfully did. The more government dependents--the more likely Democrat voters.

Let's put it this with with your "Commie Care".

If you lived in the UK you'd be spending HALF what you spend in the US. You might not get a better service, but you'd get a very good service. A service that is good enough, and you'd get it if you were unemployed, you'd get it if you were employed, your kids would get it, you parents would get it no matter how old they are. You'd get it when you walked in the door, no questions asked, no worrying how much it would cost or if you're going to have problems.

Now, if the UK were to increase their spending by 50% they'd have an excellent service, less corruption, however they have a conservative govt which is intent on making friends by making a private system. To pay people through corruption and to make the poorer people have worse healthcare and pay more for the privilege. Things are already going downhill and they've been in for 5 years.

That's the difference between "Commie Care" and the private care or "Corrupt Care" as it should be known.

I know which I prefer, and I've lived under countries with private health, public health and not very much health care.

Nothing is so expensive as that which government provides for free

No, you're wrong.

The US system costs twice the percentage of GDP as the British system.

The US system sees about 30% go on corruption. Plus you have to add on the profits made by insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and other middle men who are completely unnecessary, and you're looking at about 45% or 50% just being wasted and not going on health at all, maybe more.

So, the UK govt can provide something for half the price, make it all inclusive at that, and do a better job than the private sector manages in the US.

The US healthcare system is already government controlled from beginning to end. The idea there is anything free market about our healthcare system is just ignorance. So the solution to government generated waste is government taking it over. Yeah....

Well, that's because it's healthcare. The problem is the healthcare system is not separated. It should have private completely separate from public healthcare. If you want private, you pay for it, if not, there are state hospitals. So many people are on the take simply because it's almost impossible to stop the corruption.

 

[MarcATL]

Four words: O ba ma care

Are you insane?

Insane? No, I support a health system which is basically funded out of money from the government, that's available for all, that has a lot less corruption than the US system.

People talk about smaller govt, yet the US spent the same amount on healthcare as the UK, even though Americans had to have private health insurance and the British don't.

I'm not saying Obamacare is great, the actual thing is rubbish, but it's a step in the right direction.

You're not insane, you just want a health system funded by government with low corruption. So in other word's you're not insane, you're completely, drooling nuts

Or, I'm someone who has experienced quite a few different health systems, and one of the worst is the one which isn't controlled by the government.

Not the worst, I've been in developing country health systems as well, not the best.

What do YOU know about the health systems in other countries exactly?

I get that you like someone else paying your bills through their taxes rather than you when you receive services, that was always clear, Holmes

Only, I pay taxes.

I have two choices.

I pay taxes, they go to the govt and then to the hospital.

Or I pay the insurance company, who take a slice, then give to the hospital, but only after a load of checks which require extra workers who also take a slice to prove that what happened to me was correct. Oh, and I might have to pay for more expensive drugs too, because there's no one to demand that I be given the cheaper drugs that do the same thing as the expensive drugs.

Which do I prefer.....???

Pay more for the same service or pay less.....? It's a no brainer really.

Radicals like kaz don't like the CONCEPT of a government healthcare system, whether or not it's actually better and more efficient than a private healthcare system. They simply hate the very idea of it.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

 

[kaz]

It is, huh?

Well according to the Obama Care people, they signed up over 12 million Americans although that's been disputed and it's actually more around 10 million. That's 10 million more government dependents. How much of a larger government can you get than that?

You mean, you're pissed because 10 million people have HEALTHCARE? Are you ******* serious?

Yes, when government robs us, obviously we are OK with that. It's just that we don't want them to have the insurance. Are you ******* stupid?

So, it's better to be completely robbed blind by private companies then?

Making shit up is a great way to argue. That's just vacuous crap

Is it crap?

The US Health Care System Is Fundamentally Flawed

"Overall, Americans also pay 50 percent more than other countries for identical drugs, as a result of laws and regulations preventing the US government from reining in drug prices like other nations do"

"While the US makes up only five percent of the world's population, Americans consume over 50 percent of all the world's pharmaceutical drugs"

So, why does it cost you twice as much for drugs as people in other countries? And why do Americans use half of all of those drugs? Are you seriously suggesting that this is good for your wallet?

"A review of US healthcare expenses by the Institutes of Medicine3 (IOM) revealed that 30 cents of every dollar spent on medical care is wasted, adding up to $750 billion annually. For perspective, the defense budget proposed by the Pentagon for 2014 was just under $527 billion."

30 cents of every dollar is WASTED.

Corruption, fraud and bureaucracy cost US healthcare system up to $272 billion annually

"Corruption, fraud and bureaucracy cost US healthcare system up to $272 billion annually"

"the U.S. loses as much as $272 billion annually due to things like medical embezzlement and insurance billing fraud, both of which are rampant."

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/msparrow/documents--in use/Corruption in Health Care--The US Experience--TI Global Report on Corruption--2006--pp16-22.pdf

"Despite the essentially invisible nature of the problem, health care fraud in the United States was deemed sufficiently serious by the Clinton administration (based on cases revealed) that in 1993, Attorney General Janet Reno declared it America’s ‘number two crime problem’, second only to violent crime."

"Under the fee-for-service structure, health care providers (doctors, hospitals, specialists, and so on) are trusted to determine the appropriate levels of care, and then trusted to bill the insurer for the services they perform."

"Most significant cases of corruption have involved medical professionals, providers and corporations in the health care delivery supply chain."

MMS: Error

"In 1999 U.S. private insurers retained $46.9 billion of the $401.2 billion they collected in premiums. "

"Their average overhead (11.7 percent) exceeded that of Medicare (3.6 percent) and Medicaid (6.8 percent). Overall, public and private insurance overhead totaled $72.0 billion — 5.9 percent of the total health care expenditures in the United States, or $259 per capita "

So, 6% of what is spent on healthcare goes to the profit of the insurance companies.

"The average U.S. hospital devoted 24.3 percent of spending to administration. "

So, of the money that makes it to the hospitals, 25% goes on administration, probably a lot of this administration is completely unnecessary and is needed to deal with the insurance companies in the first place.

"Hospital administration consumed $87.6 billion, or $315 per capita (Table 1). In Canada, hospital administration cost $3.1 billion — 12.9 percent of hospital spending, or $103 per capita."

This is THREE TIMES more than is spent in Canada. So we could assume that $60 billion is going on unnecessary administration.

So that's about $460 dollars per capita that goes on unnecessary admin and profit for insurance companies.



There's so much stuff going on, and for some reason, the people who complain the most about things costing too much are the ones who ignore how much more private health costs than public health in other countries.

LOL, so when I say we have a government controlled monstrosity for a healthcare system, you refute me by blasting the system. Classic. And you didn't address the ridiculous position that you think the solution to a government controlled wasteful, expensive system is for the entity ******* it up, government, to take it over. Can't make it up.

Actually, the solution is to move towards free markets. Obamacare is the completely wrong direction. Health insurance should be like other insurance, it should protect you from catastrophic losses. Rather ObamaCARE moves us towards managed care where people get for free that which they should most pay for themselves, tat which they can afford.

 

[kaz]

When I'm paying for it, sure I'm pissed. When I lost my healthcare insurance so some french fry maker could have insurance instead, you bet I'm pissed.

More than that is Commie Care had nothing to do with everybody being insured, it had to do with making more government dependents which it successfully did. The more government dependents--the more likely Democrat voters.

Let's put it this with with your "Commie Care".

If you lived in the UK you'd be spending HALF what you spend in the US. You might not get a better service, but you'd get a very good service. A service that is good enough, and you'd get it if you were unemployed, you'd get it if you were employed, your kids would get it, you parents would get it no matter how old they are. You'd get it when you walked in the door, no questions asked, no worrying how much it would cost or if you're going to have problems.

Now, if the UK were to increase their spending by 50% they'd have an excellent service, less corruption, however they have a conservative govt which is intent on making friends by making a private system. To pay people through corruption and to make the poorer people have worse healthcare and pay more for the privilege. Things are already going downhill and they've been in for 5 years.

That's the difference between "Commie Care" and the private care or "Corrupt Care" as it should be known.

I know which I prefer, and I've lived under countries with private health, public health and not very much health care.

Nothing is so expensive as that which government provides for free

No, you're wrong.

The US system costs twice the percentage of GDP as the British system.

The US system sees about 30% go on corruption. Plus you have to add on the profits made by insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and other middle men who are completely unnecessary, and you're looking at about 45% or 50% just being wasted and not going on health at all, maybe more.

So, the UK govt can provide something for half the price, make it all inclusive at that, and do a better job than the private sector manages in the US.

The US healthcare system is already government controlled from beginning to end. The idea there is anything free market about our healthcare system is just ignorance. So the solution to government generated waste is government taking it over. Yeah....

Well, that's because it's healthcare. The problem is the healthcare system is not separated. It should have private completely separate from public healthcare. If you want private, you pay for it, if not, there are state hospitals. So many people are on the take simply because it's almost impossible to stop the corruption.

Stop the corruption by giving it to government. Keep repeating that, it cracks me up. Wow, what a sheep. You see what you want to see. Governments have destroyed healthcare systems across the world and our government is destroying our healthcare system and Obamacare is making our crappy system far more expensive. Your solution? Give it to government to ... wait for it ... fix it. Wow.

 

[kaz]

Insane? No, I support a health system which is basically funded out of money from the government, that's available for all, that has a lot less corruption than the US system.

People talk about smaller govt, yet the US spent the same amount on healthcare as the UK, even though Americans had to have private health insurance and the British don't.

I'm not saying Obamacare is great, the actual thing is rubbish, but it's a step in the right direction.

You're not insane, you just want a health system funded by government with low corruption. So in other word's you're not insane, you're completely, drooling nuts

Or, I'm someone who has experienced quite a few different health systems, and one of the worst is the one which isn't controlled by the government.

Not the worst, I've been in developing country health systems as well, not the best.

What do YOU know about the health systems in other countries exactly?

I get that you like someone else paying your bills through their taxes rather than you when you receive services, that was always clear, Holmes

Only, I pay taxes.

I have two choices.

I pay taxes, they go to the govt and then to the hospital.

Or I pay the insurance company, who take a slice, then give to the hospital, but only after a load of checks which require extra workers who also take a slice to prove that what happened to me was correct. Oh, and I might have to pay for more expensive drugs too, because there's no one to demand that I be given the cheaper drugs that do the same thing as the expensive drugs.

Which do I prefer.....???

Pay more for the same service or pay less.....? It's a no brainer really.

Radicals like kaz don't like the CONCEPT of a government healthcare system, whether or not it's actually better and more efficient than a private healthcare system. They simply hate the very idea of it.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Right, not being a socialist is what a "radical" is. Why does the word Marxist bother you again, Karl?

 

[regent]

You're not insane, you just want a health system funded by government with low corruption. So in other word's you're not insane, you're completely, drooling nuts

Or, I'm someone who has experienced quite a few different health systems, and one of the worst is the one which isn't controlled by the government.

Not the worst, I've been in developing country health systems as well, not the best.

What do YOU know about the health systems in other countries exactly?

I get that you like someone else paying your bills through their taxes rather than you when you receive services, that was always clear, Holmes

Only, I pay taxes.

I have two choices.

I pay taxes, they go to the govt and then to the hospital.

Or I pay the insurance company, who take a slice, then give to the hospital, but only after a load of checks which require extra workers who also take a slice to prove that what happened to me was correct. Oh, and I might have to pay for more expensive drugs too, because there's no one to demand that I be given the cheaper drugs that do the same thing as the expensive drugs.

Which do I prefer.....???

Pay more for the same service or pay less.....? It's a no brainer really.

Radicals like kaz don't like the CONCEPT of a government healthcare system, whether or not it's actually better and more efficient than a private healthcare system. They simply hate the very idea of it.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Right, not being a socialist is what a "radical" is. Why does the word Marxist bother you again, Karl?

Has calling people Marxist lost its impact? It was the great conservative kiss of death at one time and people would shake in their boots when called Marxists. Now it seems as if it has the same impact as being called a snot or liberal.

 

[kaz]

Or, I'm someone who has experienced quite a few different health systems, and one of the worst is the one which isn't controlled by the government.

Not the worst, I've been in developing country health systems as well, not the best.

What do YOU know about the health systems in other countries exactly?

I get that you like someone else paying your bills through their taxes rather than you when you receive services, that was always clear, Holmes

Only, I pay taxes.

I have two choices.

I pay taxes, they go to the govt and then to the hospital.

Or I pay the insurance company, who take a slice, then give to the hospital, but only after a load of checks which require extra workers who also take a slice to prove that what happened to me was correct. Oh, and I might have to pay for more expensive drugs too, because there's no one to demand that I be given the cheaper drugs that do the same thing as the expensive drugs.

Which do I prefer.....???

Pay more for the same service or pay less.....? It's a no brainer really.

Radicals like kaz don't like the CONCEPT of a government healthcare system, whether or not it's actually better and more efficient than a private healthcare system. They simply hate the very idea of it.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Right, not being a socialist is what a "radical" is. Why does the word Marxist bother you again, Karl?

Has calling people Marxist lost its impact? It was the great conservative kiss of death at one time and people would shake in their boots when called Marxists. Now it seems as if it has the same impact as being called a snot or liberal.

It has nothing to do with "impact," it has to do with your adherence to the Communist manifesto. Both support for the planks and your justification with the same anti-capitalist, anti-corporation, anti-wealthy rhetoric. Don't you ever read history or philosophy or other educational material for your own intellectual enlightenment? Or you just happy posting the ignorant bigotry and propaganda you're told by Democrats?

 

[regent]

I get that you like someone else paying your bills through their taxes rather than you when you receive services, that was always clear, Holmes

Only, I pay taxes.

I have two choices.

I pay taxes, they go to the govt and then to the hospital.

Or I pay the insurance company, who take a slice, then give to the hospital, but only after a load of checks which require extra workers who also take a slice to prove that what happened to me was correct. Oh, and I might have to pay for more expensive drugs too, because there's no one to demand that I be given the cheaper drugs that do the same thing as the expensive drugs.

Which do I prefer.....???

Pay more for the same service or pay less.....? It's a no brainer really.

Radicals like kaz don't like the CONCEPT of a government healthcare system, whether or not it's actually better and more efficient than a private healthcare system. They simply hate the very idea of it.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Right, not being a socialist is what a "radical" is. Why does the word Marxist bother you again, Karl?

Has calling people Marxist lost its impact? It was the great conservative kiss of death at one time and people would shake in their boots when called Marxists. Now it seems as if it has the same impact as being called a snot or liberal.

It has nothing to do with "impact," it has to do with your adherence to the Communist manifesto. Both support for the planks and your justification with the same anti-capitalist, anti-corporation, anti-wealthy rhetoric. Don't you ever read history or philosophy or other educational material for your own intellectual enlightenment? Or you just happy posting the ignorant bigotry and propaganda you're told by Democrats?

So where did Marx go wrong with his dialectical materialism?

 

[kaz]

Only, I pay taxes.

I have two choices.

I pay taxes, they go to the govt and then to the hospital.

Or I pay the insurance company, who take a slice, then give to the hospital, but only after a load of checks which require extra workers who also take a slice to prove that what happened to me was correct. Oh, and I might have to pay for more expensive drugs too, because there's no one to demand that I be given the cheaper drugs that do the same thing as the expensive drugs.

Which do I prefer.....???

Pay more for the same service or pay less.....? It's a no brainer really.

Radicals like kaz don't like the CONCEPT of a government healthcare system, whether or not it's actually better and more efficient than a private healthcare system. They simply hate the very idea of it.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Right, not being a socialist is what a "radical" is. Why does the word Marxist bother you again, Karl?

Has calling people Marxist lost its impact? It was the great conservative kiss of death at one time and people would shake in their boots when called Marxists. Now it seems as if it has the same impact as being called a snot or liberal.

It has nothing to do with "impact," it has to do with your adherence to the Communist manifesto. Both support for the planks and your justification with the same anti-capitalist, anti-corporation, anti-wealthy rhetoric. Don't you ever read history or philosophy or other educational material for your own intellectual enlightenment? Or you just happy posting the ignorant bigotry and propaganda you're told by Democrats?

So where did Marx go wrong with his dialectical materialism?

That man can't make his own decisions, but other men can make his decisions for him

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It is, huh?

Well according to the Obama Care people, they signed up over 12 million Americans although that's been disputed and it's actually more around 10 million. That's 10 million more government dependents. How much of a larger government can you get than that?

You mean, you're pissed because 10 million people have HEALTHCARE? Are you ******* serious?

Yes, when government robs us, obviously we are OK with that. It's just that we don't want them to have the insurance. Are you ******* stupid?

So, it's better to be completely robbed blind by private companies then?

Making shit up is a great way to argue. That's just vacuous crap

Is it crap?

The US Health Care System Is Fundamentally Flawed

"Overall, Americans also pay 50 percent more than other countries for identical drugs, as a result of laws and regulations preventing the US government from reining in drug prices like other nations do"

"While the US makes up only five percent of the world's population, Americans consume over 50 percent of all the world's pharmaceutical drugs"

So, why does it cost you twice as much for drugs as people in other countries? And why do Americans use half of all of those drugs? Are you seriously suggesting that this is good for your wallet?

"A review of US healthcare expenses by the Institutes of Medicine3 (IOM) revealed that 30 cents of every dollar spent on medical care is wasted, adding up to $750 billion annually. For perspective, the defense budget proposed by the Pentagon for 2014 was just under $527 billion."

30 cents of every dollar is WASTED.

Corruption, fraud and bureaucracy cost US healthcare system up to $272 billion annually

"Corruption, fraud and bureaucracy cost US healthcare system up to $272 billion annually"

"the U.S. loses as much as $272 billion annually due to things like medical embezzlement and insurance billing fraud, both of which are rampant."

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/msparrow/documents--in use/Corruption in Health Care--The US Experience--TI Global Report on Corruption--2006--pp16-22.pdf

"Despite the essentially invisible nature of the problem, health care fraud in the United States was deemed sufficiently serious by the Clinton administration (based on cases revealed) that in 1993, Attorney General Janet Reno declared it America’s ‘number two crime problem’, second only to violent crime."

"Under the fee-for-service structure, health care providers (doctors, hospitals, specialists, and so on) are trusted to determine the appropriate levels of care, and then trusted to bill the insurer for the services they perform."

"Most significant cases of corruption have involved medical professionals, providers and corporations in the health care delivery supply chain."

MMS: Error

"In 1999 U.S. private insurers retained $46.9 billion of the $401.2 billion they collected in premiums. "

"Their average overhead (11.7 percent) exceeded that of Medicare (3.6 percent) and Medicaid (6.8 percent). Overall, public and private insurance overhead totaled $72.0 billion — 5.9 percent of the total health care expenditures in the United States, or $259 per capita "

So, 6% of what is spent on healthcare goes to the profit of the insurance companies.

"The average U.S. hospital devoted 24.3 percent of spending to administration. "

So, of the money that makes it to the hospitals, 25% goes on administration, probably a lot of this administration is completely unnecessary and is needed to deal with the insurance companies in the first place.

"Hospital administration consumed $87.6 billion, or $315 per capita (Table 1). In Canada, hospital administration cost $3.1 billion — 12.9 percent of hospital spending, or $103 per capita."

This is THREE TIMES more than is spent in Canada. So we could assume that $60 billion is going on unnecessary administration.

So that's about $460 dollars per capita that goes on unnecessary admin and profit for insurance companies.



There's so much stuff going on, and for some reason, the people who complain the most about things costing too much are the ones who ignore how much more private health costs than public health in other countries.

MAY 31, 2012 @ 03:08 PM 62,058 VIEWS
Medicare And Medicaid Fraud Is Costing Taxpayers Billions

Medicare And Medicaid Fraud Is Costing Taxpayers Billions

The $272 billion swindle
Why thieves love America’s health-care system
May 31st 2014

http://www.economist.com/news/unite...ericas-health-care-system-272-billion-swindle