Why are you against universal health care?

[hadit]

When John Q Twelvepack needs millions of dollars for a liver transplant due to alcoholic cirrhosis, why should Transgender Susie Q pay for it?

Because transplantable livers are very limited in number and we as a society have decided that you should not be able to buy your way to the top of the list when a compatible one becomes available. You are equating a literal life-saving procedure with a totally elective cosmetic one. How does that compute in your world?

 

[Marener]

Because transplantable livers are very limited in number and we as a society have decided that you should not be able to buy your way to the top of the list when a compatible one becomes available. You are equating a literal life-saving procedure with a totally elective cosmetic one. How does that compute in your world?

And what if data supported the idea that gender reassignment surgeries reduced rates of suicide and saved lives?

 

[Polishprince]

Gender dysphoria is not a whim.

Maybe not. But having ones' nads lopped off doesn't cure it and isn't effective in any way.

Someone who is a tranny can just put on ladies' clothes and makeup, and forgo surgical mutilation entirely.

And that has an advantage, that if the sufferer of "gender dysphoria" ever regains their sanity, they can just start wearing men's clothes again and doesn't have to "de-transition"/.

 

[Polishprince]

And what if data supported the idea that gender reassignment surgeries reduced rates of suicide and saved lives?

There is no proof of that at all. Trannies with or without surgery are still fucked up in the head.

 

[hadit]

And what if data supported the idea that gender reassignment surgeries reduced rates of suicide and saved lives?

Without a liver transplant, the patient dies a painful death within a short period of time, their mental state being irrelevant. Cosmetic surgery doesn't address the underlying issues that drive people to make their bodies appear more feminine or masculine, so suicide rates are still very high among post-surgery patients. I noticed you carefully couched your assertion in the form of a question so you can't be held accountable for it. Very tricky.

Again, you're trying to compare a literal life-saving treatment to totally elective cosmetic surgery.

 

[Marener]

Right wing obsession with transgendered individuals knows no bounds. They will derail any discussion to harp on it.

 

[hadit]

Right wing obsession with transgendered individuals knows no bounds. They will derail any discussion to harp on it.

You're the one trying to equate a liver transplant with cosmetic surgery.

 

[Marener]

Without a liver transplant, the patient dies a painful death within a short period of time, their mental state being irrelevant. Cosmetic surgery doesn't address the underlying issues that drive people to make their bodies appear more feminine or masculine, so suicide rates are still very high among post-surgery patients. I noticed you carefully couched your assertion in the form of a question so you can't be held accountable for it. Very tricky.

Again, you're trying to compare a literal life-saving treatment to totally elective cosmetic surgery.

If an intervention is proven to reduce mortality in that population, it’s more than cosmetic surgery.

 

[Marener]

You're the one trying to equate a liver transplant with cosmetic surgery.

I didn’t bring up transgendered care.

Healthcare is broken. The market doesn’t work. The sooner we realize this, the sooner we can talk solutions.

 

[hadit]

If an intervention is proven to reduce mortality in that population, it’s more than cosmetic surgery.

IF being the operative term. You're throwing it in there, hoping it'll stick, but you don't have concrete evidence that it's true.

 

[Redfish]

Why are you opposed to universal healthcare for all Americans?

can you name one government program that operates efficiently? that's the reason. because it does not work, ask a brit or canadian.

 

[Marener]

IF being the operative term. You're throwing it in there, hoping it'll stick, but you don't have concrete evidence that it's true.

Just setting up an intellectual framework. I’m not able to speak authoritatively about the data because I’m not obsessed with the issue.

 

[Marener]

can you name one government program that operates efficiently? that's the reason. because it does not work, ask a brit or canadian.

Social security. Their overhead is extremely low.

 

[Hafar1014]

Right wing obsession with transgendered individuals knows no bounds. They will derail any discussion to harp on it.

We oppose child abuse based on a lie and flawed research. Mutilation of the mentally ill is abuse

 

[DGS49]

Congress has no Constitutional "power" to implement "universal healthcare," regardless of what you call it. See Article I, Section 8, and the Tenth Amendment.

A change so massive must be authorized by a Constitutional Amendment, and an Amendment requires a super-majority of Americans and their representatives to go along with it.

In the U.S., there are enough Americans who are more than satisfied with the status quo that the necessary super-majority does not exist. Add to the satisfied ones the ones who are horrified at the thought of our healthcare being turned over to the same people who run Amtrak, the Post Office, and the V.A.

But the practical reasons are even more imposing. Unlike other Western democracies, we would be trying to implement socialized medicine into an "industry" that has thrived for generations on a mixed model of a highly-regulated "market" for medical products and services. Changing the game so radically at this stage has never been done before, and would doubtless result in massive fraud, inefficiency, profiteering, and abuse, lifting an industry that now occupies 1/6 of the overall economy to about half. Consider: Congress would never implement any initiative that instantly puts a million health insurance workers on the street; they would be taken care of, one way or another, and we would all have to pay for it.

 

[hadit]

Just setting up an intellectual framework. I’m not able to speak authoritatively about the data because I’m not obsessed with the issue.

Right, you're attempting to gain some traction with an idea that you're not sure is correct. I could just as well have said, "If the data shows that post-surgery suicide rates are still unacceptably high, should Joe sixpack have to pay for Suzie Q's cosmetic surgery?" and been just as credible.

Now, I have seen data (but I'm not going to pull it up because you're not obsessed with the issue, just care enough to try to make a point without knowing if it's true or not) that shows post-surgery suicide rates are very high.

 

[Marener]

Right, you're attempting to gain some traction with an idea that you're not sure is correct. I could just as well have said, "If the data shows that post-surgery suicide rates are still unacceptably high, should Joe sixpack have to pay for Suzie Q's cosmetic surgery?" and been just as credible.

Now, I have seen data (but I'm not going to pull it up because you're not obsessed with the issue, just care enough to try to make a point without knowing if it's true or not) that shows post-surgery suicide rates are very high.

If the surgery is not beneficial, the medical establishment will not consider it standard of care and shouldn’t be reimbursed by insurance.

That’s how medical science works.

If a patient demands ivermectin to treat their prostate cancer, should everyone else pay for that?

 

[M14 Shooter]

You’ll believe any lie that Trump tells you.

You mindlessly repeat every lie the DNC tells you.

 

[M14 Shooter]

In economics and politics ....

Nothing here changes the fact you rest on a post-hoc fallacy.

 

[Polishprince]

If the surgery is not beneficial, the medical establishment will not consider it standard of care and shouldn’t be reimbursed by insurance.

That’s how medical science works.

If a patient demands ivermectin to treat their prostate cancer, should everyone else pay for that?

There is an entire establishment that makes huge fortunes mutiliating people with so called "Sex Change" operations.

The reason why its pushed is because so many quacks are making bank on it.

Ivermectin is a relatively inexpensive drug, and if a doctor has a good feeling about using it "off label" to treat Prostrate Cancer, It wouldn't be problem.