Wash Times - Obama completely overhauled health care to insure 4 million people.

[Politico]

The Moonie Times sure can slant a story for their targeted readers.

If that source is incorrect could you tell us how many folks have signed up and can you say with certainly how many have actually paid their premiums? Just curious.

Obammy can't even do that.

 

[Bombur]

[
This solution is to shift costs as opposed to making a serious effort to create a more efficient system. IMO the only real proven way to address costs is a UHC system of some sort.
.

Hey loonybird. The proven way to contain costs is to ban health insurance or only allow catastrophic policies. Then patients would NOT run to the doctor for every little thing and when they did need health care, they would shop around.

The proof is that until 1950 most americans did NOT have health insurance and health care was a small part of the economy. THINK

 

[Bombur]

So it's not really a solution?

It is a solution to one maybe two problems but not all problems within our health care system.

It tries to leverage our existing Medicaid model and our current private insurance model to expand coverage to the sick and the poor who don't have insurance. The biggest change is obviously the mandate which is required to manage a universal private insurance approach.

So this is not a fix, and the burden for carrying the insurance is on the backs of the middle class, since it's been decided to waive the business mandate.

Getting employers involved in health care is a mistake and one of the biggest problems with our current system, pre and post Obamacare. A private insurance model would always rest on the backs of the middle class.

If the system was more efficient that wouldn't be such a problem. As it stands now it is a huge weight around the neck of economic progress.

 

[Bombur]

[

Uh every modern nation has health care for the poor provided by the government so I am not sure where you were going there.

So does america. It's medicaid and the EMTALA act.

Did you think I didn't include the US as a modern nation?

 

[Bombur]

It makes sense that you'd equate childish name-calling with reality. Your moral calculus is along the lines of the schoolyard bully.

Now you think you are being bullied?

You really do have a martyr complex. You are not being bullied because we have Medicaid and Medicare or public schools or public roads or whatever else keeps you awake at night. You are being laughed at because you have tried to equate UHC to fascism and refuse to even admit that efficiency matters.

If anyone is being laughed at, it's you. You believe in socialized medicine, most Americans don't.

Most Americans would be mighty annoyed if you took away their Medicare. The issue is really socialized health insurance as opposed to socialized medicine.

For many Americans it is a matter of belief as opposed to an attempt by them to look at other systems and learn how they could be better. Some even go so far as to argue that we shouldn't even care if it is more efficient.

 

[Bombur]

So, everybody? Even those who can afford to pay for their own health care? Why do we need to worry about them?

If they can afford their own health care they would already be covered.

That is simply not true.

Key Facts about the Uninsured Population | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

24% of them make more than double the poverty level. That means they could afford catastrophic plans to avoid serious financial problems in a major health event.

The fact is that they simply didn't want to pay for it.

The context of my comment was not the uninsured but those with pre-existing conditions.

I agree that many people could have technically afforded health care before the pre-existing condition happened. That assumption is the basis of Obamacare btw.

 

[dblack]

Now you think you are being bullied?

You really do have a martyr complex. You are not being bullied because we have Medicaid and Medicare or public schools or public roads or whatever else keeps you awake at night. You are being laughed at because you have tried to equate UHC to fascism and refuse to even admit that efficiency matters.

If anyone is being laughed at, it's you. You believe in socialized medicine, most Americans don't.

Most Americans would be mighty annoyed if you took away their Medicare. The issue is really socialized health insurance as opposed to socialized medicine.

For many Americans it is a matter of belief as opposed to an attempt by them to look at other systems and learn how they could be better. Some even go so far as to argue that we shouldn't even care if it is more efficient.

I haven't heard anyone saying we shouldn't care about efficiency. I'm saying efficiency isn't justification for state enforced conformity. Especially when there's no solid consensus on the matter. I'm saying voluntary cooperation really isn't such a bad thing, and a far more civilized alternative than state mandated 'solutions'.

 

[Bombur]

If anyone is being laughed at, it's you. You believe in socialized medicine, most Americans don't.

Most Americans would be mighty annoyed if you took away their Medicare. The issue is really socialized health insurance as opposed to socialized medicine.

For many Americans it is a matter of belief as opposed to an attempt by them to look at other systems and learn how they could be better. Some even go so far as to argue that we shouldn't even care if it is more efficient.

I haven't heard anyone saying we shouldn't care about efficiency. I'm saying efficiency isn't justification for state enforced conformity. Especially when there's no solid consensus on the matter. I'm saying voluntary cooperation really isn't such a bad thing, and a far more civilized alternative than state mandated 'solutions'.

You called me a fascist and a bully for being a proponent of Medicare and Medicaid.

If you want to change your mind and look at reality then I would consider that some great personal growth on your part. Until then you are relegated to being a blind ideologue.

 

[dblack]

Most Americans would be mighty annoyed if you took away their Medicare. The issue is really socialized health insurance as opposed to socialized medicine.

For many Americans it is a matter of belief as opposed to an attempt by them to look at other systems and learn how they could be better. Some even go so far as to argue that we shouldn't even care if it is more efficient.

I haven't heard anyone saying we shouldn't care about efficiency. I'm saying efficiency isn't justification for state enforced conformity. Especially when there's no solid consensus on the matter. I'm saying voluntary cooperation really isn't such a bad thing, and a far more civilized alternative than state mandated 'solutions'.

You called me a fascist and a bully for being a proponent of Medicare and Medicaid.

Nope. Called you a fascist and a bully for being eager to use coercive government in the name of 'efficiency'. Government should be for maintaining justice, not directing citizens as though they were employees or soldiers, or cogs in some grand 'system'.

 

[Bombur]

I haven't heard anyone saying we shouldn't care about efficiency. I'm saying efficiency isn't justification for state enforced conformity. Especially when there's no solid consensus on the matter. I'm saying voluntary cooperation really isn't such a bad thing, and a far more civilized alternative than state mandated 'solutions'.

You called me a fascist and a bully for being a proponent of Medicare and Medicaid.

Nope. Called you a fascist and a bully for being eager to use coercive government in the name of 'efficiency'. Government should be for maintaining justice, not directing citizens as though they were employees or soldiers, or cogs in some grand 'system'.

So you called me a fascist and a bully for being a proponent of Medicare and Medicaid because in your world such government involvement treats people as cogs in some grand system.

In reality I am treating people like living breathing people who are paying too much for too little health care. That this has a real impact on their well being which you claimed should be ignored because... fascism.

Everything I said is proving true. You are a blind ideologue and arguing with you is pointless because reality just isn't important to you.

 

[Synthaholic]

Because, most people don't want government healthcare.....haven't you paid attention to the polls?

The ACA is insurance company health care. All the government did was set minimum standards.

It did way more than that, but you know that already.

It did? Other than new regulations, what did it do?

 

[Synthaholic]

So yes, it is the ACA that caused these plans to be cancelled and it's the loss of individual underwriting that is keeping any company from offering new plans at a price competitive with the old plans.

Define 'competitive'.

 

[dblack]

You called me a fascist and a bully for being a proponent of Medicare and Medicaid.

Nope. Called you a fascist and a bully for being eager to use coercive government in the name of 'efficiency'. Government should be for maintaining justice, not directing citizens as though they were employees or soldiers, or cogs in some grand 'system'.

So you called me a fascist and a bully for being a proponent of Medicare and Medicaid because in your world such government involvement treats people as cogs in some grand system.

We weren't talking about Medicare and Medicaid. We were talking about your proposal to mandate UHC, or single payer; to force everyone into the same system in the name of efficiency. You don't seem to want to 'own' that any longer, which I'll take as a good sign. Maybe you're reflecting on how cynical such an ambition really is?

 

[Synthaholic]

And a lot of those 4 million never paid their premium. Real number insured is prolly more like 3 million - 1% of america!!!

Another retard thread from Annoyingly Slow Driver.

And a lie to boot!

EVERYONE in America is now safe from being dropped for a pre-existing condition.

You lose again, America wins. Suck it, dope!

What good is that if the prescriptions are too expensive now or if the treatment facilities are no longer in the network?

That's another biggie coming down the pike.

I can't argue hypothetical situations that do not exist and may not ever exist.

 

[Synthaholic]

I wonder how millions upon millions upon millions of folks made it without health insurance from the time of Adam and Eve to the point that Obama assumed the Presidency? Billions of people maybe? The hardcore pioneers who crossed America in covered wagons -- no insurance. The Pilgrims who sailed across the Atlantic -- no insurance. The Vikings who managed to survive through their harsh environment -- no insurance. The Greek empire, the Roman Empire, the Egyptian Empire, the Babylonian Empire, the Assyrian Empire -- all survived without health insurance. Why on planet earth has it become paramount that all of mankind MUST have insurance? I thought today's secular evolutionists were all about "survival of the fittest" and all that.

Up till 1950 or so most americans did not have health insurance and we managed fine. Many people have suggested we return to those days and ban health insurance. It would certainly encourage patients to shop around when they need health care and also not run to a doctor for every little thing.

The average age for life expectancy in 1860 was 42 years old. Yeah people were doing great back then

Urine ******* idiot

Also, doctors made house calls and charges were very reasonable.

The reason it's expensive now has a lot to do with medical coding, and charging high rates for every single thing a provider does.

 

[Synthaholic]

The Moonie Times sure can slant a story for their targeted readers.

If that source is incorrect could you tell us how many folks have signed up and can you say with certainly how many have actually paid their premiums? Just curious.

Obammy can't even do that.

This, from a guy who declares: "If you want a neg make a clueless comment about my political affiliation."

 

[Bombur]

Nope. Called you a fascist and a bully for being eager to use coercive government in the name of 'efficiency'. Government should be for maintaining justice, not directing citizens as though they were employees or soldiers, or cogs in some grand 'system'.

So you called me a fascist and a bully for being a proponent of Medicare and Medicaid because in your world such government involvement treats people as cogs in some grand system.

We weren't talking about Medicare and Medicaid. We were talking about your proposal to mandate UHC, or single payer; to force everyone into the same system in the name of efficiency. You don't seem to want to 'own' that any longer, which I'll take as a good sign. Maybe you're reflecting on how cynical such an ambition really is?

Medicare and Medicaid are just other examples of the same type of program. If you want to try and argue how your blind ideology applies to UHC but not Medicare and Medicaid I would be happy to listen. It is bound to be hilarious.

 

[dblack]

So you called me a fascist and a bully for being a proponent of Medicare and Medicaid because in your world such government involvement treats people as cogs in some grand system.

We weren't talking about Medicare and Medicaid. We were talking about your proposal to mandate UHC, or single payer; to force everyone into the same system in the name of efficiency. You don't seem to want to 'own' that any longer, which I'll take as a good sign. Maybe you're reflecting on how cynical such an ambition really is?

Medicare and Medicaid are just other examples of the same type of program. If you want to try and argue how your blind ideology applies to UHC but not Medicare and Medicaid I would be happy to listen. It is bound to be hilarious.

My "blind ideology" is capable of making distinctions of degree; whereas yours, apparently, is not. Medicare and Medicaid are safety net programs, to help out the relatively few unfortunate souls who need to depend on others. You're proposing to force everyone into such dependency, to treat everyone as though they are incapable of taking care of themselves.

 

[Bombur]

We weren't talking about Medicare and Medicaid. We were talking about your proposal to mandate UHC, or single payer; to force everyone into the same system in the name of efficiency. You don't seem to want to 'own' that any longer, which I'll take as a good sign. Maybe you're reflecting on how cynical such an ambition really is?

Medicare and Medicaid are just other examples of the same type of program. If you want to try and argue how your blind ideology applies to UHC but not Medicare and Medicaid I would be happy to listen. It is bound to be hilarious.

My "blind ideology" is capable of making distinctions of degree; whereas yours, apparently, is not. Medicare and Medicaid are safety net programs, to help out the relatively few unfortunate souls who need to depend on others. You're proposing to force everyone into such dependency, to treat everyone as though they are incapable of taking care of themselves.

Medicare is age based.

Just because people can take care of themselves that doesn't mean they do not suffer harm from inefficiencies.

 

[Politico]

The ACA is insurance company health care. All the government did was set minimum standards.

It did way more than that, but you know that already.

It did? Other than new regulations, what did it do?

Other than impose a fine on a bunch of poor people gee I dunno.