Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Obama knew millions could not keep their health insurance

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by zraver View Post
    You think a constitutional law professor would understand how government works and that he is not King Hussien I of America.
    I don't know what to think? He seems like an idealist with little executive ability. This email aired on Fox asks a good question.



    This message came to us from Bill in Kentucky.

    "Putting things in perspective: March 21st 2010 to October 1 2013 is 3 years, 6 months, 10 days. December 7, 1941 to May 8, 1945 is 3 years, 5 months, 1 day. What this means is that in the time we were attacked at Pearl Harbor to the day Germany surrendered is not enough time for this progressive federal government to build a working webpage. Mobilization of millions, building tens of thousands of tanks, planes, jeeps, subs, cruisers, destroyers, torpedoes, millions upon millions of guns, bombs, ammo, etc. Turning the tide in North Africa, Invading Italy, D-Day, Battle of the Bulge, Race to Berlin - all while we were also fighting the Japanese in the Pacific!! And in that amount of time - this administration can't build a working webpage."
    Here is the email I read on the air tonight | Special Report | Bret Baier | Fox News Channel
    To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

    Comment


    • Originally posted by astralis View Post
      JAD,



      politicians listen to polls and tell people what they want to hear? i'm shocked, shocked i tell you...
      Asty: you aren't getting away with that lame comeback.:) This was no ordinary 'lie'. It's clear as 'read my lips-no more taxes'. Most political lies are full of conditional words and good intentions. This one has promise written all over it.


      anyhow, healthcare costs ultimately need to be borne by -someone-. as US law prevents hospitals from throwing people out of the ER, the US taxpayer is already bearing these costs. maternity care for the poor? where do people think the funds for when poor pregnant women run to the ER is coming from?
      You're aware that medical care in the US costs on average $8,000 a person per year. Really, one need say no more than that to illustrate how onerous the ACA is. If you take away subsidies, every American would have to pay $8k a year in premiums just to cover the annual bill for healthcare, but millions can't afford $8k a year. That means millions of other Americans will have to pay higher premiums to cover the shortfall. Of course, the government will subsidize low-income Americans, but subsidies ultimately come from tax revenues. It's not hard to see where this is all heading. It's a big boost for the healthcare industry, which will soon make up one of the largest segments of the GDP. A nice, neat way to pump up the economy.


      the ACA ultimately acts to front-load many of these costs onto heathcare insurance vice healthcare, and to turn previously hidden costs into more tangible ones.
      What door the money flows through doesn't matter and there is no difference between hidden and tangible costs; they're still costs.
      To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

      Comment


      • Comment


        • JAD,

          Asty: you aren't getting away with that lame comeback. This was no ordinary 'lie'. It's clear as 'read my lips-no more taxes'. Most political lies are full of conditional words and good intentions. This one has promise written all over it.
          it was certainly a stupid promise. note that in my support of the ACA i never cited this claim as a positive factor. the core premise of the ACA, after all, is to eliminate free-riding. these type of plans represent a type of free-riding by both consumer and provider: plans largely designed with minimum upfront costs, so that when something did happen, the consumer would face a high chance of being denied coverage. it's better than complete free-riding by not having insurance, but not significantly so.

          If you take away subsidies, every American would have to pay $8k a year in premiums just to cover the annual bill for healthcare, but millions can't afford $8k a year. That means millions of other Americans will have to pay higher premiums to cover the shortfall.
          again, this does not differ significantly from the current situation. the net effect is to expand the number of people paying the increased healthcare costs from those with insurance to a wider population. yes, more people will pay; that's the whole point. increasing the number of people with insurance coverage isn't just a form of liberal do-goodism (although it is), it's also a good small-c conservative idea in the long-term to lower health costs.

          OoE mentioned the canadian case. what wasn't mentioned was that despite a significantly more socialist healthcare regime, canadians spend about 55% of what americans spend on healthcare, with government healthcare spending per capita in the US being 25% higher anyway.

          What door the money flows through doesn't matter and there is no difference between hidden and tangible costs; they're still costs.
          the point of having health insurance exchanges and much more tangible costs is to give the consumer more freedom of choice to pick between plans, which i believe is a rather conservative ideal...:)

          finally,

          "Putting things in perspective: March 21st 2010 to October 1 2013 is 3 years, 6 months, 10 days. December 7, 1941 to May 8, 1945 is 3 years, 5 months, 1 day. What this means is that in the time we were attacked at Pearl Harbor to the day Germany surrendered is not enough time for this progressive federal government to build a working webpage. Mobilization of millions, building tens of thousands of tanks, planes, jeeps, subs, cruisers, destroyers, torpedoes, millions upon millions of guns, bombs, ammo, etc. Turning the tide in North Africa, Invading Italy, D-Day, Battle of the Bulge, Race to Berlin - all while we were also fighting the Japanese in the Pacific!! And in that amount of time - this administration can't build a working webpage."
          wasn't addressed to me but i always found this a funny argument. an argument against a "progressive federal government" based on an example in which the US federal government commandeered 40-50% of the US GDP, raised taxes to 96% on the wealthy, conscripted millions and nationalized whole industries...i'm sure the ACA webpage would be a fairly stunning success if a tenth of those resources were provided for the cause. :)
          Last edited by astralis; 15 Nov 13,, 14:42.
          There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

          Comment


          • Originally posted by astralis View Post

            OoE mentioned the canadian case. what wasn't mentioned was that despite a significantly more socialist healthcare regime, canadians spend about 55% of what americans spend on healthcare, with government healthcare spending per capita in the US being 25% higher anyway.
            And significant wait times for diagnostic and non-emergency procedures and worse cancer survival rates as well. Canada (and the UK's) system is great for meeting the needs of acute illnesses and trauma and sucky for chronic, initial diagnosis, specialized and other types of health care.

            Comment


            • z,

              And significant wait times for diagnostic and non-emergency procedures and worse cancer survival rates as well. Canada (and the UK's) system is great for meeting the needs of acute illnesses and trauma and sucky for chronic, initial diagnosis, specialized and other types of health care.
              i don't see this translated in data. cancer mortality rates are the same; the canadian system is ranked ahead of the US by the WHO; indicators such as life expectancy and infant mortality rates are somewhat better in canada, although of course whether or not this is strictly related to healthcare quality is debateable.

              in short quality of care cannot be too different, while the cost differential is extraordinary. moreover, the minimum baseline for canada is significantly better, because poor people have access to a much higher level of healthcare, while of course the middle class/wealthy will always have the option of going into a private system if they want immediate specialized care.
              There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

              Comment


              • My point was that in the Canadian case, our health care costs has not gone down. In fact, it has gone up, though still smaller than the US but our history has stated that if you're looking for savings, forget it. It won't happen. No hospital is going to put heart surgery on sale anytime soon.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                  Looking at the history of Canadian national healthcare, are any of you Americans are actually serious that your costs are going to come down? Are you all seriously telling me that hospitals will drop their prices? What? Have a sale on open heart surgery? Buy now, use later?
                  perhaps that is the problem. There is no competitive market forces at play and it is not allowed to be at play.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                    My point was that in the Canadian case, our health care costs has not gone down. In fact, it has gone up, though still smaller than the US but our history has stated that if you're looking for savings, forget it. It won't happen. No hospital is going to put heart surgery on sale anytime soon.
                    With or without ACA, health care costs are going to go up but the question is by how much and ACA is trying to slow down the escalation of the costs.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by astralis View Post
                      wasn't addressed to me but i always found this a funny argument. an argument against a "progressive federal government" based on an example in which the US federal government commandeered 40-50% of the US GDP, raised taxes to 96% on the wealthy, conscripted millions and nationalized whole industries...i'm sure the ACA webpage would be a fairly stunning success if a tenth of those resources were provided for the cause. :)
                      I hereby agree to develop one (1) fully functional ACA website for one (1) hundredth (1/100) of fifty (50) percent of the US GDP for one (1) year. You write up the contract Asty and I'll sign :)
                      In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                      Leibniz

                      Comment


                      • do i get a cut? more importantly, can i get the cut in butter cookies?
                        There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by astralis View Post
                          do i get a cut? more importantly, can i get the cut in butter cookies?
                          But of course, you'll receive a weekend for two at the Kingsgate Hotel in Palmerston North. The butter cookies can be sourced from the dairy down the road, tell them Iain sent you :)
                          In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                          Leibniz

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                            But Dale makes a point, that is also trolling.
                            I agree. I just want to show how ridiculous his argument was. Basically trading BS for BS.

                            Can everybody just act like adults for f--k's sake?
                            You know what they say about politics ... I am leaving this blank because I got too many to choose from.

                            Comment


                            • Obamacare is about making people get insurance that doesn't have any. Bottom line, the ones who have been purchasing health insurance is now going to be penalized for doing the right thing. Does that make any sense? Well, no. That is really pissing the insured ones off, and you know what some of them are going to do? Not buy insurance and pay the penalty for awhile. That will bring the entire law to its knees and possibly kill it. I'm thinking about just paying the penalty for awhile myself.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
                                With or without ACA, health care costs are going to go up but the question is by how much and ACA is trying to slow down the escalation of the costs.
                                It's not. It was meant to be affordable for the people it covered (at least until the country goes bankrupt). Now it looks like its not even that.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X