# So now with the EVIL Corporation Insurance Companies losing their supplemental billions from the gov



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?

Dems rip Trump's 'spiteful' decision to end key ObamaCare payments


> "Based on guidance from the Department of Justice, the Department of Health and Human Services has concluded that there is no appropriation for cost-sharing reduction payments *to insurance companies* under Obamacare," White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said.


 Did you know that insurance companies were giving large donations to the Democrats so then the Democrats would steal your money and give it to the insurance companies?  Yes, you stupid liberal voters made it happen.

Obamacare: Voters, are you stupid? - CNN.com


> Obamacare: Democrat Voters, are you stupid?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Two Thumbs (Oct 13, 2017)

It's like the dnc openly bribed ins companies and their lackeys and got their sheep to cheer it on.


billions added to the debt = meh


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

Hey, I'd be happy to go to Single Payer, and just be done with it. 

But you guys insisted that we not leave the Insurance Companies behind. 

Not to worry, big insurance will let Republicans in Congress know what is what soon enough, just like they did on repealling the ACA.  

Trump - President in Name Only.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Hey, I'd be happy to go to Single Payer, and just be done with it.
> 
> But you guys insisted that we not leave the Insurance Companies behind.
> 
> ...


lets go from a horrible idea to a worse one.


frigging brilliant


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

Two Thumbs said:


> lets go from a horrible idea to a worse one.
> 
> 
> frigging brilliant



Except every other country has Single Payer. 

They live longer, have lower infant mortality rates and spend a lot less than we do. 

But it's a terribly idea because you are horrified a poor person can get the same quality of care you get, right?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > lets go from a horrible idea to a worse one.
> ...


unlike most liars on this board, I have never claimed to be well off or a business owner.

the rest of your gibberish is put together by people that want to see America fall from within, just like the rest of the world is doing.

or haven't you noticed that the 4th Reich defeated Europe?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Hey, I'd be happy to go to Single Payer, and just be done with it.
> 
> But you guys insisted that we not leave the Insurance Companies behind.
> 
> ...


Buyer Beware: The Failure of Single-Payer Health Care


> Buyer Beware: The Failure of Single-Payer Health Care


 Why single payer health care is a terrible option (Opinion) - CNN


> Why single payer health care is a terrible option


 As I said before, liberals have a deathwish, not only upon the rest of US but themselves because liberals have no clue how to be happy.  That is why they seek ways to self suicide....


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

Two Thumbs said:


> unlike most liars on this board, I have never claimed to be well off or a business owner.
> 
> the rest of your gibberish is put together by people that want to see America fall from within, just like the rest of the world is doing.
> 
> or haven't you noticed that the 4th Reich defeated Europe?



Not sure what you are babbling about a "4th Reich", but never mind. 

Back to the point, though.  

The US spends more per capita on health care than any other country in the world.  

Despite that... 

We have the highest infant mortality rate in the industrialized world. 






We have the lowest life expectancy among advanced countries. 






And 62% of bankruptcies are predicated by medical crisis. 

So we spend more, put ourselves in the poorhouse, and we get the worst results, and you are trying to claim that we are soooo much smarter than the Europeans?  

Really?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > lets go from a horrible idea to a worse one.
> ...


Every other country has to be subsidized by OUR government because they don't pay as much into the GDP of the UN.
Every other country doesn't have to have a military since we defend the world, so they can use more of their money to fund lazy liberals who sit and do nothing, like ours do.
Joe, if you love other countries, GET THE FUCK OVER THERE, we are tired of your whiney, white, two house, ass, telling the rest of US what we need to do.  Worthless fuck..

Moonbattery: Psychiatrist Confirms: Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder


> Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded. Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> As I said before, liberals have a deathwish, not only upon the rest of US but themselves because liberals have no clue how to be happy. That is why they seek ways to self suicide....



Yawn, guy... getting a little bored with the right wing claiming single payer is worse, when we get the worst results with our current system.


----------



## Geaux4it (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > lets go from a horrible idea to a worse one.
> ...



Other countries.... blah, blah, blah...

You're free to move comrade

-Geaux


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > As I said before, liberals have a deathwish, not only upon the rest of US but themselves because liberals have no clue how to be happy. That is why they seek ways to self suicide....
> ...





> when we get the worst results with our current system


 Obamacare is the current system or didn't you know that?  And you have confirmed that it is worse, when only Democrats jumped on board and behind closed doors, enabled the government to give the liberal insurance companies billions of our tax dollars so those corporations can then give major donations back to the democrats.  Joe has finally told the truth, I am going to agree with you Joe..


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Every other country has to be subsidized by OUR government because they don't pay as much into the GDP of the UN.



We spend 8 Billion on the UN.  We spend 2.7 TRILLION on health care.  Look, I already know we've established that you are math challenged, but this isn't an argument. 



andaronjim said:


> Every other country doesn't have to have a military since we defend the world, so they can use more of their money to fund lazy liberals who sit and do nothing, like ours do.



Defend the world from what, exactly?  A bunch of third world countries we've terrified ourselves of. 

Okay, realty check time.  

We spend more than the top ten countries combined on the military, and of those, 8 of them are allies. 






But here's the thing, buddy.  We spend 17% of our GDP on health care.  most of the single payer countries- where they get better results - spend 8-11%.  So not only aren't they pissing away a lot of money on military crap they don't need, they are spending their money on health care a lot smarter than we are. 




andaronjim said:


> Joe, if you love other countries, GET THE FUCK OVER THERE, we are tired of your whiney, white, two house, ass, telling the rest of US what we need to do. Worthless fuck..



Wow, Guy, I know you are upset you can't be half as cool as I am... 

I don't "love" other countries.  I just look as something they are doing that is smart, and say, "Hey, maybe we should try that!" 

But people like you live in horror that poor people might get the same health care you get.  Seriously, how fucked up is that?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

I am ROTFLMAO,  it hurts that much that Joe just opened his mouth and inserted his foot..  Oh it is tooooo funny...


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Every other country has to be subsidized by OUR government because they don't pay as much into the GDP of the UN.
> ...


hey Joe do the illegals that come here and don't speak a lick of Engrish, get the same health care I get when they go into the emergency room because their brat kids who should also be south of the border come in with a cold and get FREE treatment?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Obamacare is the current system or didn't you know that? And you have confirmed that it is worse, when only Democrats jumped on board and behind closed doors, enabled the government to give the liberal insurance companies billions of our tax dollars so those corporations can then give major donations back to the democrats. Joe has finally told the truth, I am going to agree with you Joe..



Wow, guy, the problem with ObamaCare is that it was the same system we had before.  Even though a system that profits on  human suffering is always going to be a bad idea, because this is America, we can't ever make the rich wait in line for something. 

You see, back when it was called "RomneyCare", you guys had no problem with it. Romney did it, and you guys oooohed and aaaahed about this wonderful "Free Market" solution to the health care problem. 

And then the Black Guy Did it.  

Mind you, Democrats would have liked to have gotten a public option and a medicare buy in for those over 55, either of which would have solved many of the current problems. But a few DINO's like Joe Lieberman (D-Israel) blocked those things, so we ended up with RomneyCare on a national level.


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 13, 2017)

`
`
I'm a major advocate of the single payer system.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> hey Joe do the illegals that come here and don't speak a lick of Engrish, get the same health care I get when they go into the emergency room because their brat kids who should also be south of the border come in with a cold and get FREE treatment?



Oh, no, they get more expensive treatment because you dumbasses won't invest in community clinics like European countries do.  

THat's the wonderful thing.  When it comes to a choice between being mean spirited and being cost effective, mean spirited wins every time.


----------



## forkup (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


For profit healthcare is your current system. ACA is an attempt too improve it a bit. You are celebrating the fact that less people will become insured because the for PROFIT insurance market won't want to take the loss and will step out of the ACA market altogether. You are celebrating that people are going too die. How does that even work? When the companies are enrolled in something that the democrats set up they are liberal. But when liberals point out that big companies get tax brakes and they shouldn't, liberals are envies of wealth? Btw I'm yet to see ANY plan the conservatives have suggested that improve health care. There's a reason congress wont repeal and replace ACA. It's because they know that they then will be held accountable for it being worse.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Obamacare is the current system or didn't you know that? And you have confirmed that it is worse, when only Democrats jumped on board and behind closed doors, enabled the government to give the liberal insurance companies billions of our tax dollars so those corporations can then give major donations back to the democrats. Joe has finally told the truth, I am going to agree with you Joe..
> ...


Please stop Joe, I cant stop laughing at how stupid are, still trying to change history and making your Faux Pau about Obamacare....


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > hey Joe do the illegals that come here and don't speak a lick of Engrish, get the same health care I get when they go into the emergency room because their brat kids who should also be south of the border come in with a cold and get FREE treatment?
> ...


So you do admit that illegals are using up OUR tax dollars?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> I'm a major advocate of the single payer system.



As am I. 

You see, the only legitimate expenses for health care should be paying for the time of the provider and the materials used.  

But because we have big pharma, big medical and big insurance making obscene profits off the current system, we have a lot of adders that increase cost while actually reducing the quality of care.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> So you do admit that illegals are using up OUR tax dollars?



They're paying taxes, too... so not having a problem with that. 

"Oh, my God, those illegals are using my tax dollars after I cheated them on fair wages for that work they did for me when I picked them up outside the Home Depot!"  

White People!  A never ending source of amusement!


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


Oh no, not the "people are going to die" again trick. Hell mother fuckers like you kill 33,000 born and unborn babies a month, why are you so worried now about a few who die without healthcare?  Because those are actual dimocrap voters who weren't aborted?  Go find a fucking Job like the rest of US and pay for your healthcare like the rest of US. Obama's roaring economic recovery that you libfucs say President Trump inherited, you can get a job, right?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Please stop Joe, I cant stop laughing at how stupid are, still trying to change history and making your Faux Pau about Obamacare....



Guy, given that you are challenged on things like Math and Science, I could explain it to you again and you still wouldn't understand.  

Have you figured out basic division yet?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Windparadox said:
> 
> 
> > I'm a major advocate of the single payer system.
> ...


And Obamacare has been giving billions of tax dollars to those corps, so then those corps could donate to the demcrap party.  You libfucks don't see the irony in that?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Please stop Joe, I cant stop laughing at how stupid are, still trying to change history and making your Faux Pau about Obamacare....
> ...


Still mad that I caught you talking bad about Obamacare?  Seems that way now that you are trying to use the Rules for Radicals on me again.  Bwaaaaahhhaaaaahhhhaaaaa..


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> `
> `
> I'm a major advocate of the single payer system.


You like self suicide?  Must be, because you vote liberal.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Oh no, not the "people are going to die" again trick. Hell mother fuckers like you kill 33,000 born and unborn babies a month, why are you so worried now about a few who die without healthcare?



That's the great Right Wing fallback, that it's okay they are for dead kids because liberals support abortion rights.  

Reality check- fetuses aren't people, and there were just as many abortions happening before abortion was legalized as after.  

Oh yeah, countries with single payer?  They have less abortions per capita than we do.  A lot less.  



andaronjim said:


> Go find a fucking Job like the rest of US and pay for your healthcare like the rest of US. Obama's roaring economic recovery that you libfucs say President Trump inherited, you can get a job, right?



But why should health care be linked to employment to start with?  

You see, if you are working for health insurance and paying for it and never get sick (because frankly, if you have chronic health problems, your employer WILL try to get rid of you!) then you are kind of getting ripped off.


----------



## Care4all (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> 
> Dems rip Trump's 'spiteful' decision to end key ObamaCare payments
> 
> ...


Your ignorance is astounding!

What Trump has cut, is the cost sharing reduction for the POOREST in this Nation, on the exchange....

The poorest!   While leaving the subsidies for those making TRIPLE the amount of income than those on the Cost sharing reduction plans.

He is the AntiChrist.....there is no greater evil walking earth.....he's the Destroyer in Revelations, the Little Horn in the Book of Daniel...no doubt.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Still made that I caught you talking bad about Obamacare? Seems that way now that you are trying to use the Rules for Radicals on me again. Bwaaaaahhhaaaaahhhhaaaaa..



Guy, the thing is, you are the kind of ignorant right winger that Saul was thinking about. 

You see, it really makes sense for rich people to vote Republican... but folks like you, not so much.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Oh no, not the "people are going to die" again trick. Hell mother fuckers like you kill 33,000 born and unborn babies a month, why are you so worried now about a few who die without healthcare?
> ...


Because Joe back when the liberal kept the temporary income tax that was supposed to go away, companies, and unions would give their employees perks to come work for them, getting those most able to do the job.  You libfucks who are lazy assholes, couldn't compete so now you have to punish everyone with your bullshit broken Obamacare because then everyone, illegals too, can now get fucked up care.  I say round up all the liberals and ship them to a country that has single payer, but take their passports away, because soon they will be crying like little girls to get back in the US.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

Care4all said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> ...


So you ignored the part about " cost-sharing reduction payments *to insurance companies* under Obamacare ".  I don't need to respond anymore to idiots like you  and Joe.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 13, 2017)

Care4all said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> ...


Oh, you mean he just another christian in name only..


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


That is a good poster boi for you, since you do exactly what is highlighted on the meme..


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> `
> `
> I'm a major advocate of the single payer system.




I'm a major advocate of educating the foolish...

 Free market answers should always be considered before collectivist responses to America's policies.
In the case of the Bolshevik Fallacy, ObamaCare, the flaw is in misunderstanding human nature.
If people have skin in the game, financially, they spend money far more carefully.









*When you spend your own money on yourself (box 1), you try to maximize quality while minimizing cost. And that drives the businesses that are competing for your money to constantly seek more efficient ways of producing better products at better prices.*

*Governments, by contrast, don’t worry about efficiency or cost."*
*Why Single-Payer Health Care Delivers Poor Quality at High Cost | Daniel J. Mitchell*


----------



## Care4all (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


You are so ignorant it's beyond belief.  The payment you claim is to the insurance companies is FOR THE POOREST on the exchange to help these poor pay for their deductibles and out of pocket expense. 

THEY lose their insurance without these cost sharing reductions.....because they can't pay them.

He and his minions are evil to the very core.


----------



## Moonglow (Oct 13, 2017)

Care4all said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...


But hey, at least them poh rich folks can look forward to having a tax cut.. We can never do enough to kiss the rich aristocrats asses...Like Androjism loves to do...


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> I'm a major advocate of educating the foolish...


`
Unfortunately, you have nothing of value to teach but since I am polite, I will hear you out.


----------



## fncceo (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Except every other country has Single Payer.



And every country that has it is in debt to their eyeballs.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

Moonglow said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


Rules for Radicals again, all you can do, huh?, as it does get tiring...


> *4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.* You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity."


Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Because Joe back when the liberal kept the temporary income tax that was supposed to go away, companies, and unions would give their employees perks to come work for them, getting those most able to do the job.



Who said the income tax was supposed to "go away"?  I think you are confusing right wing memes. 

Here is what happened. Health care became a perk when the government froze wages during WWII to prevent inflation and to keep employees at critical industries. 

But at the time, it just didn't' cost that much, so it wasn't that big of a deal. The problem, of course, is that when the rest of the world was creating national health care systems, we just kept expanding on what we had. 



andaronjim said:


> You libfucks who are lazy assholes, couldn't compete so now you have to punish everyone with your bullshit broken Obamacare because then everyone, illegals too, can now get fucked up care.



Again, guy, the problem was that before O-care, the Insurance companies would do things like declare your cancer a pre-existing condition or an elective surgery or something like that so they wouldn't have to pay it. 



andaronjim said:


> I say round up all the liberals and ship them to a country that has single payer, but take their passports away, because soon they will be crying like little girls to get back in the US.



I would say we should round up all the right wingers and send them to a country where they practice the libertarian shit they want...

Oh, wait. No country in the world actually does that.  They already know it's a terrible idea.


----------



## Muhammed (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > unlike most liars on this board, I have never claimed to be well off or a business owner.
> ...



Those lies were debunked a long time ago.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

fncceo said:


> And every country that has it is in debt to their eyeballs.



Really? 

Because we are in debt past our GDP (106% of GDP), and Germany's national debt is only 63% of GDP. The UK is at 89%, Canada is at 66%.


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 13, 2017)

Muhammed said:


> Those lies were debunked a long time ago.


`
Proof?


----------



## Care4all (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> Windparadox said:
> 
> 
> > `
> ...


So, abolish the tax deduction for employers providing most of our insurance now....right?


And abolish the tax write offs we get for medical expenses, abolish military medical coverage, abolish MEDICARE and Medicaid, and  VA health care and CHIP...children's health care, and abolish TRCARE, and federal grants and loans for medical schooling, abolish research and development monies, all federal and state employee insurance, etc etc etc that is all federal and state gov't funds.....

THEN AND ONLY THEN
Will you have your so called "Free Market"

Sounds good?


----------



## fncceo (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> > And every country that has it is in debt to their eyeballs.
> ...


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Because Joe back when the liberal kept the temporary income tax that was supposed to go away, companies, and unions would give their employees perks to come work for them, getting those most able to do the job.
> ...





> Who said the income tax was supposed to "go away"?


 The Origin of the Income Tax


> The income tax, however, gave the government the keys to every door and the sole right to change the locks.
> 
> Today the American people are no longer the master and the government has ceased to be the servant.


 I know Joe that you wont bother with this article, but keep on showing the rest of us how fucking ignorant you are with the history of taxes on the US citizens.  I am done with you and you other worthless liberals, as I have to find new people who aren't as fortunate and help bring them to find their pursuit of happiness, by helping them avoid paying taxes with loopholes provided by the federal government.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > I'm a major advocate of educating the foolish...
> ...




Excellent.

1. The desire of many who support ObamaCare is to have others pay their healthcare insurance costs.

2. .....ObamaCare is not healthcare....it's healthcare insurance. Since 1986, everyone has had federally mandated healthcare.

3. Those in actual need of assistance to purchase healthcare insurance amounts to less than 0.05% of the population. There are many ways to solve their problem outside of destroying a very popular system: 85-90% of those within the system were happy with it.

4. ObamaCare has squandered enough money to give each of the above in need some $15,000 to purchase private healthcare insurance.

5. Rather than healthcare costs rising, healthcare costs were actully falling or leveling off.

6. Before ObamaCare, out of pocket expenses in the US were actually lower than in many nations with national insurance.

7. *"Obama Promised Healthcare Premiums Would Fall $2,500 Per Family; They Have Climbed $4,865"
*
8. 'Bolshevik' is the accurate description, as ,*nationalized health care was one of the first programs enacted by the Bolsheviks *after they seized power in 1917.

9. *When you spend your own money on yourself you try to maximize quality while minimizing cost producing better products at better prices.* *Governments, by contrast, don’t worry about efficiency or cost.*

*10 . Here's Obama stating he's for single payer: 

Be well.*


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

fncceo said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > fncceo said:
> ...



You know what, this is why I don't waste time on you.  

I gave you other advanced countries with Single Payer that were LOWER than us, you come up with a chart that includes poor countries (Greece, Portugal) and a third world country, along with Japan, which is in debt or reasons that have nothing to do with single payer.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

Care4all said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Windparadox said:
> ...




Totalitarian governance is base ignoring what the people want.

Hence...ObamaCare.


Prior to the full court press to which you have succumbed, costs were decreasing, and some 90% were happy with their healthcare.

Increases in healthcare expenditures: 
2003 8.6%
2004 6.9%
2005 6.5%
2006 6.7%
2007 6.1%
Compare to 10.5% in 1970 and 13% in 1980
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/06/08/downgrading-american-medical-c/print
Also: Baldwin Wallace University



Here's what we found, poll by poll, in reverse chronological order:

• *Quinnipiac University, Sept. 2009*. "How satisfied are you with your health insurance plan?" 54 percent very satisfied, 34 percent somewhat._Total: 88 percent satisfaction_.

• *Quinnipiac University, June 2009*. "How satisfied are you with your health insurance plan?" 49 percent very satisfied, 36 somewhat satisfied._Total: 85 percent satisfaction_.

• *ABC News/Washington Post, June 2009*. "For each specific item I name, please tell me whether you are very satisfied with it, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. ... Your health insurance coverage." 42 percent very satisfied, 39 percent somewhat satisfied. T_otal: 81 percent satisfaction._

• *Mathew Greenwald & Associates for the Employee Benefit Research Institute, May 2009*. "Overall, how satisfied are you with your current health insurance plan?" 21 percent extremely satisfied, 37 percent very satisfied, 30 percent somewhat satisfied. _Total: 88 percent satisfaction_.

• *ABC News/Washington Post, June 2009*. "For each specific item I name, please tell me whether you are very satisfied with it, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. ... Your health insurance coverage." 42 percent very satisfied, 39 percent somewhat satisfied. _Total: 81 percent satisfaction._

• *Mathew Greenwald & Associates for the Employee Benefit Research Institute, Aug. 2008*. "Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following aspects of your health care. ... Quality of health care I receive through my (health insurance) plan." 31 percent extremely satisfied, 41 percent very satisfied, 23 somewhat satisfied. _Total: 95 percent satisfaction._

• *Mathew Greenwald & Associates for the Employee Benefit Research Institute, Aug. 2008*. "Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following aspects of your health care. ... Overall satisfaction with my health (insurance) care plan." 23 percent extremely satisfied, 38 percent very satisfied, 30 percent somewhat satisfied. _Total: 91 percent satisfaction._

• *Mathew Greenwald & Associates for the Employee Benefit Research Institute, May 2008*. "Overall, how satisfied are you with your current health insurance plan?" 17 percent extremely satisfied, 36 percent very satisfied, 33 percent somewhat satisfied. _Total: 86 percent satisfaction._

If you average these eight scores, the total rate of satisfaction is 87 percent. In all but one poll, the satisfaction level was below Will's stated level of 95 percent.

One poll, taken five months before Obama was inaugurated, did come up with 95 percent satisfaction. But alone among these eight polls, that survey asked participants about the "quality of health care I receive through my (health insurance) plan." While we decided that the wording was close enough to merit inclusion on our list, the modest difference in satisfaction levels may stem from the way the question was phrased. Many people feel more warmly toward their doctors than they do toward their insurers.

So, while one poll with unique wording pegged satisfaction at 95 percent, the average of all relevant polls over a two-year period was eight points lower than what Will cited. However, Will is correct that the levels of satisfaction with one's own health insurance are consistently high. Indeed, they're extraordinarily high, when one considers how rarely surveys find such high levels of agreement among Americans. Since Will portrayed the larger point accurately, even while modestly overstating the number, we rate his comment Mostly True.

Will says that 95 percent of people with health insurance are satisfied with it


And, of course, the experience with ObamaCare has proven exactly what the Right predicted.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> I know Joe that you wont bother with this article, but keep on showing the rest of us how fucking ignorant you are with the history of taxes on the US citizens. I am done with you and you other worthless liberals, as I have to find new people who aren't as fortunate and help bring them to find their pursuit of happiness, by helping them avoid paying taxes with loopholes provided by the federal government.



YOu are right, the article you posted wasn't worth bothering with.  

Here's why we have an income tax. Because what we were doing before that wasn't working!  

so you are an accountant this week?  I thought you were a plane mechanic?  Seriously, you have more careers than Barbie!


----------



## debbiedowner (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> 
> Dems rip Trump's 'spiteful' decision to end key ObamaCare payments
> 
> ...



Did you know the insurance companies also gave large donations to republicans?


----------



## debbiedowner (Oct 13, 2017)

Care4all said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> ...




Well, have to see how this plays out for 2018.  In the rate increases for 2018, it was supposed to have been built in just in case this happened. Now, these dumb shits that cry they are paying for other's insurance truly are going to pay. I have already re-enrolled several of my clients off-exchange and their rate increases were anywhere from 18% to 56% increase. Yes, some companies started off-exchange Oct 1.

This is now very much now called Trumpcare.

Trump to end key ACA subsidies, a move that will threaten the law’s marketplaces


----------



## Muhammed (Oct 13, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> Muhammed said:
> 
> 
> > Those lies were debunked a long time ago.
> ...


Do your own homework.

Put it this way, I have never lied to you before. You can check back as far as you want. Why would I ruin my reputation here as an impeccable source of truth now?


----------



## Care4all (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Nice distraction!

so, how about addressing my post...

in order to have this "free market" that you claim will solve all ills,

Are you willing to drop:

MEDICAID
MEDICARE
VA CARE
MILITARY CARE 
TRICARE 
CHIPS
Research and development grants
Medical student loans
Employer tax deductions for health care insurance
Individual tax deductions for insurance premiums
Individual tax deductions for medical expenses
Free child Vaccinations 
Medical University grants
Sliding scale Health Care Clinics
Paying for the indigent care through emergency rooms
State employee Health Care
Federal Employee Health care

etc etc etc that is government funded so that we can have a FREE MARKET that will bring health care costs down?

YES or NO answer please....


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 13, 2017)

Muhammed said:


> Do your own homework.Put it this way, I have never lied to you before. You can check back as far as you want. Why would I ruin my reputation here as an impeccable source of truth now?


`
`
In other words, you make stuff up as you go along. Gotcha.


----------



## fncceo (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> I don't waste time on you.



I always knew I was born under a lucky star.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

Care4all said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...




How to judge healthcare:

life expectancy: many people die for reasons that can’t be controlled the medical profession, such as* auto accidents, murder,* etc., and once you factor out care crashes and homicides, the US ranks number one in worldwide life expectancy!

“One often-heard argument, voiced by the New York Times' Paul Krugman and others, is that America lags behind other countries in crude health outcomes. But such outcomes reflect a mosaic of factors, such as diet, lifestyle, drug use and cultural values. It pains me as a doctor to say this, but health care is just one factor in health.

In _The Business of Health,_ Robert Ohsfeldt and John Schneider factor out intentional and unintentional injuries from life-expectancy statistics and find that *Americans who don't die in car crashes or homicides outlive people in any other Western country.*
[Before Bolshevik....er, ObamaCare]

And if we measure a health care system by how well it serves its sick citizens, American medicine excels.
Protected Blog › Log in


" The standardized estimate of life expectancy at birth is the mean of the predicted value for each country over the period 1980–99. As shown in table 1-5, the raw (not standardized) mean life expectancy at birth for the United States over this period was 75.3 years, compared to 78.7 years for Japan, 78.0 years for Iceland, and 77.7 years for Sweden. However, after accounting for the unusually high fatal-injury rates in the United States, the estimate of standardized life expectancy at birth is 76.9 years, which is higher than the estimates for any other OECD country."                                            
http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf





BTW.....were you able to find any errors here:

1. The desire of many who support ObamaCare is to have others pay their healthcare insurance costs.

2. .....ObamaCare is not healthcare....it's healthcare insurance. Since 1986, everyone has had federally mandated healthcare.

3. Those in actual need of assistance to purchase healthcare insurance amounts to less than 0.05% of the population. There are many ways to solve their problem outside of destroying a very popular system: 85-90% of those within the system were happy with it.

4. ObamaCare has squandered enough money to give each of the above in need some $15,000 to purchase private healthcare insurance.

5. Rather than healthcare costs rising, healthcare costs were actully falling or leveling off.

6. Before ObamaCare, out of pocket expenses in the US were actually lower than in many nations with national insurance.

7. *"Obama Promised Healthcare Premiums Would Fall $2,500 Per Family; They Have Climbed $4,865"*
8. 'Bolshevik' is the accurate description, as ,*nationalized health care was one of the first programs enacted by the Bolsheviks *after they seized power in 1917.

9. *When you spend your own money on yourself you try to maximize quality while minimizing cost producing better products at better prices.* *Governments, by contrast, don’t worry about efficiency or cost.*

*10 . Here's Obama stating he's for single payer: *


None?

Excellent.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > I know Joe that you wont bother with this article, but keep on showing the rest of us how fucking ignorant you are with the history of taxes on the US citizens. I am done with you and you other worthless liberals, as I have to find new people who aren't as fortunate and help bring them to find their pursuit of happiness, by helping them avoid paying taxes with loopholes provided by the federal government.
> ...


Poor poor Joe, I was an avionics technician for over 15 years, collected a large sum of money(all legally) avoided paying taxes while overseas, and came back here participating in the stock market amassing an even larger fortune. I find other people who are willing to sacrifice a little time to learn how to become wealthy also.  Those that listen get rich, and conservative, those that don't, stay bitching and moaning how unfair life is, so lets tax the rich more.  I am laughing at you Joe, and your two houses, and your liberal victimhood.....


----------



## forkup (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> Windparadox said:
> 
> 
> > `
> ...


Again in the case of healthcare the facts don't support that theory. In most other industrialized countries, the government takes a way more active role in healthcare. This results is a cheaper and better healthcare system. Why, because the for profit motive is taken as much as possible out of the equation. Economics of healthcare: which countries are getting it right?


----------



## Care4all (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Jebus Christo 

Are you some kind of BOT?

Answer the question PC....

You posted a link about letting the free market work to bring prices down...

WHY DID YOU POST  on the free Market is the way to go,

IF YOU DO NOT believe in the Free Market?

It's a yes or no answer PC, 

Do you agree with having a free market for Health Care OR NOT?

Do you agree to CUT all of those government subsidies and government monies paid in the health care market that interfere with the market place and the so called "Free Market"?

YES or NO?

PLEASE 
DO NOT
Post another one of your links and stop this bull crap of yours, and answer the question as a NORMAL human being and not a preprogrammed robot....

IF you can not do that, PLEASE do not respond to me!  thank you!


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 13, 2017)

Care4all said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...





> Post another one of your links and stop this bull crap of yours, and answer the question as a NORMAL human being and not a preprogrammed robot....


 Says the goose stepping, liberal kool aid drinking, useful idiotic, mind numbed, brain washed, pot smoking, liberal, lamestream media parrot...


----------



## Muhammed (Oct 13, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> Muhammed said:
> 
> 
> > Do your own homework.Put it this way, I have never lied to you before. You can check back as far as you want. Why would I ruin my reputation here as an impeccable source of truth now?
> ...


 In other words, you are too lazy to educate yourself. No wonder you're a Moonbat.


----------



## Winston (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> Windparadox said:
> 
> 
> > `
> ...



Daniel J Mitchell, any simpleton that gives even an ounce of credence to something posted by someone with a Phd in Economics from George Mason, and working for the Cato Institute to boot, is the epitome of "foolish".  The Economics department of George Mason is not an educational institution, it is a cult, and with the same grasp on reality as Scientology.


----------



## Winston (Oct 13, 2017)

Care4all said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Windparadox said:
> ...



Medicare and Medicaid is the real subsidy for private insurance companies.  The government, via Medicare and Medicaid, takes care of the elderly, the disabled, and the poor.  That leaves healthy working people for the private insurance market.  Stupid is too kind of a word to define that action.  And the real kicker, the government pays about the same per beneficiary to care for the elderly, the disabled, and the poor as private insurance companies charge to take care of healthy working Americans.  We being SCAMMED.


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 13, 2017)

Winston said:


> Medicare and Medicaid is the real subsidy for private insurance companies.  The government, via Medicare and Medicaid, takes care of the elderly, the disabled, and the poor.  That leaves healthy working people for the private insurance market.  Stupid is too kind of a word to define that action.  And the real kicker, the government pays about the same per beneficiary to care for the elderly, the disabled, and the poor as private insurance companies charge to take care of healthy working Americans.  We being SCAMMED.


`
I agree. We are getting scammed and screwed no matter which you choose. My preference for single payer come about after years of reading research, reports from both insurance and health care professionals and attending meetings.  I'm not likely to change that based on what someone online says. If I err, it is on the side of people, not profits.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Windparadox said:
> ...




You couldn't be more wrong.
You might try to be...but you wouldn't be successful.


How to judge healthcare:

life expectancy: many people die for reasons that can’t be controlled the medical profession, such as* auto accidents, murder,* etc., and once you factor out care crashes and homicides, the US ranks number one in worldwide life expectancy!

“One often-heard argument, voiced by the New York Times' Paul Krugman and others, is that America lags behind other countries in crude health outcomes. But such outcomes reflect a mosaic of factors, such as diet, lifestyle, drug use and cultural values. It pains me as a doctor to say this, but health care is just one factor in health.

In _The Business of Health,_ Robert Ohsfeldt and John Schneider factor out intentional and unintentional injuries from life-expectancy statistics and find that *Americans who don't die in car crashes or homicides outlive people in any other Western country.*
[Before Bolshevik....er, ObamaCare]

And if we measure a health care system by how well it serves its sick citizens, American medicine excels.
Protected Blog › Log in


" The standardized estimate of life expectancy at birth is the mean of the predicted value for each country over the period 1980–99. As shown in table 1-5, the raw (not standardized) mean life expectancy at birth for the United States over this period was 75.3 years, compared to 78.7 years for Japan, 78.0 years for Iceland, and 77.7 years for Sweden. However, after accounting for the unusually high fatal-injury rates in the United States, the estimate of standardized life expectancy at birth is 76.9 years, which is higher than the estimates for any other OECD country." 
http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf





BTW.....were you able to find any errors here:

1. The desire of many who support ObamaCare is to have others pay their healthcare insurance costs.

2. .....ObamaCare is not healthcare....it's healthcare insurance. Since 1986, everyone has had federally mandated healthcare.

3. Those in actual need of assistance to purchase healthcare insurance amounts to less than 0.05% of the population. There are many ways to solve their problem outside of destroying a very popular system: 85-90% of those within the system were happy with it.

4. ObamaCare has squandered enough money to give each of the above in need some $15,000 to purchase private healthcare insurance.

5. Rather than healthcare costs rising, healthcare costs were actully falling or leveling off.

6. Before ObamaCare, out of pocket expenses in the US were actually lower than in many nations with national insurance.

7. *"Obama Promised Healthcare Premiums Would Fall $2,500 Per Family; They Have Climbed $4,865"*
8. 'Bolshevik' is the accurate description, as ,*nationalized health care was one of the first programs enacted by the Bolsheviks *after they seized power in 1917.

9. *When you spend your own money on yourself you try to maximize quality while minimizing cost producing better products at better prices.* *Governments, by contrast, don’t worry about efficiency or cost.*

*10 . Here's Obama stating he's for single payer: *



None?

Excellent.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

Care4all said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...




You'll do anything to change the subject from the abject failure of ObamaCare, the policies of the abject failure as President, Hussein Obama, huh?



As you have found, everything I posted is 100% true, accurate and correct.

Don't you wish you could say that?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

Winston said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Windparadox said:
> ...





And yet you were unable to deny any of said post.

What does that say about you?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> Winston said:
> 
> 
> > Medicare and Medicaid is the real subsidy for private insurance companies.  The government, via Medicare and Medicaid, takes care of the elderly, the disabled, and the poor.  That leaves healthy working people for the private insurance market.  Stupid is too kind of a word to define that action.  And the real kicker, the government pays about the same per beneficiary to care for the elderly, the disabled, and the poor as private insurance companies charge to take care of healthy working Americans.  We being SCAMMED.
> ...




'research'???

Yet you weren't able to find any errors in the education that I provided for you.

Government school grad, huh?


----------



## Winston (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> Winston said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



The idea that a "product" with virtually no elasticity somehow does have a measurable substitution effect is laughable on it's face and completely rebutted by fundamental BASIC economics.  But honestly, that is far too advanced for a simpleton like you to even begin to understand.


----------



## Winston (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> Windparadox said:
> 
> 
> > Winston said:
> ...



One doesn't have to find "errors" in information that is not topical.  For instance, you pointed out that health care expenditures have increased under Obamacare.  Well DUH HUH, millions more Americans now have health insurance, of course the "expenditures" went up.  Your inability to intuitively understand such critical concepts is indicative of your ignorance.  Or that government health care was one of the first acts of the Bolsheviks.  So what, Israel has single payer health care as well, what does that mean?  Or that Obama is for single payer---so was Donald Trump.

Nope, you are nothing more than a legend in your own mind.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

Winston said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Winston said:
> ...





Still can't find any errors in my posts?

Excellent.


----------



## Winston (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> Winston said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Before we can even begin to have an intelligent discussion you would have to demonstrate you understand simple Economic concepts like "elasticity" and "substitution effect".  Otherwise, well I am just toying with a simpleton.

Tell me, does it really make sense to you that the government can take care of the elderly, the disabled, and the poor at the same cost per person as private health insurers collect for healthy working Americans?


----------



## forkup (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> forkup said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Wow you really do spout theory like a robot. Health Care Index by Country 2017 Mid-Year
This is an actual valuation of health care. The US is number 27. You are trying too explain away a very simple statistic by trying to  make a case for the US being a more dangerous place to live. The simple fact is, in almost every way you measure people's health the US lags behind other developed nations. You are somehow trying too make a case that the free market gives better results, besides theories that simply aren't supported by facts you have nothing too support that claim. The problems of Obamacare are irrelevant since your premise is that it's the government interference part that makes it fail, while even with ACA the US still has way less government interference then other nations who yield better result. In short you can't establish cause and effect to support your theory.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...





OK....OK....stop begging....

I'll be happy fill in yet one more of your lacunae....

 WHO/UN

So we have been told that the United States is listed at number 37 in world ranking for health care. Here is why only fools and America-bashers attribute any significance to this rating: WHO/UN states that their data “is hampered by the weakness of routine information systems and insufficient attention to research” and when they couldn’t find data, they “developed [data] through a variety of techniques.” WHO accepts whatever governments tell them, including reputable regimes such as Castro’s Cuba.
WHO | Message from the Director-General

The oh-so*-political* WHO/UN is not thrilled with governments like the US, as they have determined that we do not have a progressive-enough tax system. This is one of the criteria for judging our healthcare.

WHO, “World Health Organization Assesses

theWorld’sHealth Systems,” press release, undated,

WHO | World Health Organization Assesses the World's Health Systems

  1. Health Level: 25 percent

2. Health Distribution: 25 percent

3. Responsiveness: 12.5 percent

4. Responsiveness Distribution: 12.5 percent

5. Financial Fairness: 25 percent
http://www.cato.org/pubs/bp/bp101.pdf



After an intensive survey of over 1000 respondents, half of whom were members of UN staff, they designed a measurement of healthcare in which 62.5% of the criteria of their healthcare study on some type of “equality!”
WHO | The world health report 2000 - Health systems: improving performance

Note that the United States suffers in the WHO/UN healthcare ratings due to a definition of fairness which reads: “the smallest feasible differences between individuals and groups.” Therefore a poor nation that does not have our level of expensive or experimental treatment, and therefore lets all suffers die, would have a higher rating than the US.

 This is not to imply that only the rich in America can get the ‘expensive’ treatment, since there are many options such as a)getting a loan, b) asking a family member or a charity for help, c) find a doctor, hospital, or drug company willing to work at a reduced rate.  All are common.

          And because we have rich people who pay a great deal for the best healthcare, enabling research and development, the end result is that this brings costs down and makes treatment affordable for everyone, even in socialist countries.



Have you ever read a book?

Sooooo.....when did you graduate from government school?


----------



## Winston (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> forkup said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Cato Institute.

USELESS

Try again.

But, because I am bored I will glance at it.

First, Cato admits life expectancy is a reasonable attribute to measure.  Ours is lower than almost all industrialized nations.

Second, Cato admits Health Distribution and Responsiveness is a reasonable attribute to measure.  Again, we fall short despite the claim of long "waiting lists" in nations with government health care.

The only statistics the Cato Institute has a problem with are those that measure "fairness".  Like when a family spends a disproportionate amount of their disposable income on health care.  To the Cato Institute it is not a problem that health care costs are the largest factor for individual bankruptcies.  To the Cato Institute it is not a problem that some families largest expense in any given month is health care while other families spend only a token of their disposable income on health care.  The Cato Institute has a problem with "fair" because they know, our capitalistic predatory market based health care system is inherently UNFAIR.

So yeah, WORTHLESS.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

Winston said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...





I've noticed that when the facts are irrefutable, real dunces blame the source.

Pretty much proves that you are a government school grad.




Just between the two of us….are you just a leeeeettttle disappointed at how you turned out?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

Winston said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...




"The Cato Institute is unquestionably a credible source. But don’t take my word for it. According to the 2015 Global Go To Think Tank Index Report from the University of Pennsylvania, Cato is ranked 11th in the world [PDF], just behind Amnesty International, and Eric Lichtblau of the _New York Times_ described Cato as "one of the country’s most widely cited research organizations.”"
https://www.quora.com/Is-the-Cato-Institute-a-credible-source-Why-or-why-not



So.....turns out you are useless, huh?


----------



## Winston (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> Winston said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



*Promoting an American public policy based on individual liberty, limited government, free markets and peaceful international relations*

That is directly from the Cato Institute's website.  If you can't see the inherent bias in any information they would post you are being willfully ignorant.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

Winston said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Winston said:
> ...




*Promoting an American public policy based on individual liberty, limited government, free markets and peaceful international relations.*

It's exactly what the Founders believed.




Communists, Liberals, Nazis and Leftists of every stripe endorse the very opposite...

the collective, command and control regulation of private industry, and overarching government that can order every aspect of the private citizen's life....right down to control of his thoughts and speech.


Seems we stand on opposite sides of the political divide.
One of us is correct, and the other is you.


----------



## Winston (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> Winston said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Most widely cited, I have no doubt, confirmation bias is a real problem.  But, now that you have submitted that Amnesty International is a better source, let's just go to them.
.

*[E]veryone in the United States has the human right to health care. Reform measures should ensure that every person has access to comprehensive, quality health care. No one should be discriminated against on the basis of income, health status, gender, race, age, immigration status or other factors.*.

Amnesty International USA (AIUSA) - Right to Health Care - ProCon.org.


----------



## Winston (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> Winston said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



The founders?  Man but you are stupid.  The "founders" financed small pox vaccinations for native american tribes during the Lewis and Clark expedition.  Obviously, they would support financing of the health care of illegal immigrants as well.  Please, don't start spouting "founders" when you have no clue as to what they supported or believed in.


----------



## forkup (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> forkup said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


So I actually read your links and I fail to see how they help your case. 
-First attempt. The WHO is biased because it accepts information from dubious sources like Cuba.
*Maybe true, but there are plenty of countries who have reliable information who score better, so that doesn't help you.*
-Second attempt. The WHO is biased because they don't like the US
*The WHO is not a political organisation in fact the US is it's biggest donor. It's a typical childish thing to say. The equivalent of "the teacher doesn't like me, that's why I'm failing math."*
-Third attempt. The WHO doesn't have the correct definition of fair.
*Your definition of fair is different from the most amount of people should have the best possible health care?*
I have asked you to establish a simple cause, effect to support your premise, all you offer is a reasoning why you feel the facts don't support your premise. They call that a deflection.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

Winston said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Winston said:
> ...




Soo....you use Amnesty International as your authority, I use the United States Constitution.

What more is there to say....I can't force you to be correct.


*[E]veryone in the United States has the human right to health care.*
Now....in point of fact...and with reference to the above, the finest and most successful President in the last hundred years mandated healthcare for every person...legal or otherwise...in the nation to have health care over 30 years ago.


The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) is an act of the United States Congress, passed in *1986* as part of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA). ... EMTALA's provisions apply to all patients, not just to Medicare patients.
*Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia*
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia



Amble on over to a library...I'm certain a nice adult will help you get a library card.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...





So when are you leaving?

I can help you pack.



BTW....
...the finest and most successful President in the last hundred years mandated healthcare for every person...legal or otherwise...in the nation to have health care over 30 years ago.


The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) is an act of the United States Congress, passed in *1986* as part of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA). ... EMTALA's provisions apply to all patients, not just to Medicare patients.
*Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia*
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia



Amble on over to a library...I'm certain a nice adult will help you get a library card.


----------



## jasonnfree (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



You say " we defend the world  ...?   We can't even help Puerto Rico and save thousands of lives, so how are we defending the world?  Of course we send our military everywhere and drop lots of bombs and all, but that's where the money is.


----------



## forkup (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> forkup said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Lol, don't bother I'm Belgian. My wife is American, she choose to come over here. One of the reasons was better healthcare in my country. I do find it interesting that when you aren't allowed to deflect but actually are asked to argue your point on merit you attack me. See that's the problem with only having theories to argue a point. In the real world being an ideologue doesn't cut it. The best example of that is your favorite target. Communism failed because the politburo looked at the world trough ideological glasses and when reality came knocking they weren't prepared. You believe in the free market unconditionally, if you believe into something in that way, you will be blind to it's shortcomings. Reality hurts when it hits you in the back of your head.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...




Let's review
1. I showed that some 90% liked their plan before ObamaCare
2. It's been revealed that Obama lied his way through the full court press to pass the scam
3. The US had the worlds best healthcare proven by life expectancy
4. The US has had universal healthcare since 1986
5. You can't stand up to some little jabs

Communism failed because it required slaughter and oppression.

Yes....free market is the answer.
·                     a) Walgreens has retail health clinics staffed by board-certified Family Nurse Practitioners and Physicians Assistants, and expects to have 400 open by 2010, and CVS plans on about 500. Anyone can walk in and get treatment for about 1/6 the cost of an emergency room, plus about 2/3 are paid for by insurance. Treatment includes: Respiratory Illnesses

·                Additional Treatments

·                Skin Conditions

·                Minor Injuries

·                Diagnostic Testing

·                Wellness

·                Vaccinations

·                Healthcare Clinics | Walgreens

b) Wal-Mart offers some 400 different prescription drugs @ $10 for a 90 day supply.  CVS, Target, Kroegers, Food Lion, and a number of others have similar plans.

c) eHealthinsurance.com allows you to find health insurance in your zip.

d) Healthcarebluebook.com tells the costs of various procedures and treatments, allowing the consumer to negotiate prices with practitioners.

e) Teledoc gets you on the phone with a licensed physician in 3 hours or less, for $35- or it’s free!

f) American Well will let you talk to a doctor by webcam, text, phone, or IM for $45.  And some Wal-Marts have virtual clinics where they can actually look into eyes, ears, and throat by webcam.  http://www.americanwell.com/healthplan_FAQs.html

g) For an annual fee of just $480 for singles ($580 for couples and $680 for families) The No Insurance Club offers affordable pre-paid health care plans that cover basic medical services from a participating board-certified physician, with no deductibles, no additional premiums, and no co-payments and either 12 or 16 visits per year.   http://www.noinsuranceclub.com/news/

h) Cosmetic surgery is the closest thing we have to a true free-market system in American. No insurance coverage, and the consumer shops around among practitioners: the price has been falling over time in real terms — despite a huge increase in volume and considerable technical innovation (which is blamed for increasing costs for every other type of surgery).


i. "The 14194 clinics in this database offer medical services (some may also offer dental services) and *are free, low-cost, low-cost with a sliding scale based on income, or offer some type of financial assistance. *If you're under or uninsured, and looking for a nearby free clinic, sliding scale clinic, or low-cost clinic, where you and/or your family can go for lost cost medical care, NeedyMeds can help. *Please note that the clinics listed are not necessarily free.*

For additional information and appointments contact the clinic directly.

For a description of which clinics we include on our website and what type of information we provide on each clinic, visit our Free/Low-Cost/Sliding Scale Clinicspage."

Free/Low-Cost/Sliding Scale Clinics | NeedyMeds

Anything else I can help you with?


----------



## forkup (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> forkup said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


1. You claimed 90 percent of Americans liked their health insurance, no link was provided. It's also irrelevant considering you're claim is that Obamacare sucks because the government interferes in the free market.
2. Irrelevant to your claim again.
3. No you are trying to make that case by trying to disqualify all deaths by accident or homicide. they call that cherry picking data.
4. No the US has universal care that doesn't cover anything besides basic care for large sections of the populace
5. I don't mind jabs if you are capable of providing what I ask. I mind jabs that are intended to deflect.
a) Everybody here has a general practitioner who comes to the house if your not mobile. The same applies to nurses, physical therapists and even babysitters and cleaning ladies to give people care. Yes it's a service provided by our health insurance. For a slight extra charge. Emergency rooms are only utilized in cases when more then general care is needed. And serve you in minutes from admittance in most cases.
b) Our pharmacies don't make you wait to fill your prescriptions. They give you your medicine when you walk in.
c) We don't have to search for our health insurance, its universal.
d) We have an optional hospitalization insurance, this covers additional costs incurred if you get hospitalized. At the cost of 410 euro annually for my family of 3.
e) We have something called a global medical dossier this means that our entire medical history is available to any doctor we come in contact with.
f) Some cosmetic surgeries are covered under our health insurance provided medical need can be established.
*So try again.*


----------



## forkup (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> forkup said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


1. You claimed 90 percent of Americans liked their health insurance, no link was provided. It's also irrelevant considering you're claim is that Obamacare sucks because the government interferes in the free market.
2. Irrelevant to your claim again.
3. No you are trying to make that case by trying to disqualify all deaths by accident or homicide. they call that cherry picking data.
4. No the US has universal care that doesn't cover anything besides basic care. For large sections of the populace.
5. I don't mind jabs if you are capable of providing what I ask. I mind jabs that are intended to deflect.
a) Everybody here has a general practitioner who comes to the house if your not mobile. The same applies to nurses, physical therapists and even babysitters and cleaning ladies to give people care. Yes it's a service provided by our health insurance. For a slight extra charge. Emergency rooms are only utilized in cases when more then general care is needed. And serve you in minutes from admittance in most cases.
b) Our pharmacies don't make you wait to fill your prescriptions. They give you your medicine when you walk in.
c) We don't have to search for our health insurance, its universal.
d) We have an optional hospitalization insurance, this covers additional costs incurred if you get hospitalized. At the cost of 410 euro annually for my family of 3. 
e) We have something called a global medical dossier this means that our entire medical history is available to any doctor we come in contact with.
f) Some cosmetic surgeries are covered under our health insurance provided medical need can be established.
*So try again.*


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

fncceo said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't waste time on you.
> ...



Or you just say stupid shit... like 'I get to steal this sand because my sky pixie said so...."


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Poor poor Joe, I was an avionics technician for over 15 years, collected a large sum of money(all legally) avoided paying taxes while overseas, and came back here participating in the stock market amassing an even larger fortune.



And you have a 12 inch dick, a supermodel girlfriend and a Porsche... sure you do.

You make all this money and you can't do simple division....


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 13, 2017)

It seems that all these threads devolve into the same structure of argument, name calling, and accusations.

I have to ask....

Why is it that  America is treated as a monolith when it comes to healthcare.

You can be in some pretty lousy situations (overpriced and underserviced) and you can be in some very good ones.  

There is no one single description that describes America's health care.  There are characteristics (such as it is not free and available to everyone......), but they do not define our health care system.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...



1." You claimed 90 percent of Americans liked their health insurance, no link was provided. It's also irrelevant considering you're claim is that Obamacare sucks because the government interferes in the free market."

You should learn to believe what I say....if you are capable of learning.

"When we started this health care debate a year ago, 85 percent of the American people had health insurance, and 95 percent of the 85 percent were happy with it."
— George Will on Sunday, February 21st, 2010 in a roundtable segment on ABC's This Week"
Will says that 95 percent of people with health insurance are satisfied with it PolitiFact



Here's what we found, poll by poll, in reverse chronological order:

• *Quinnipiac University, Sept. 2009*. "How satisfied are you with your health insurance plan?" 54 percent very satisfied, 34 percent somewhat._Total: 88 percent satisfaction_.

• *Quinnipiac University, June 2009*. "How satisfied are you with your health insurance plan?" 49 percent very satisfied, 36 somewhat satisfied._Total: 85 percent satisfaction_.

• *ABC News/Washington Post, June 2009*. "For each specific item I name, please tell me whether you are very satisfied with it, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. ... Your health insurance coverage." 42 percent very satisfied, 39 percent somewhat satisfied. T_otal: 81 percent satisfaction._

• *Mathew Greenwald & Associates for the Employee Benefit Research Institute, May 2009*. "Overall, how satisfied are you with your current health insurance plan?" 21 percent extremely satisfied, 37 percent very satisfied, 30 percent somewhat satisfied. _Total: 88 percent satisfaction_.

• *ABC News/Washington Post, June 2009*. "For each specific item I name, please tell me whether you are very satisfied with it, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. ... Your health insurance coverage." 42 percent very satisfied, 39 percent somewhat satisfied. _Total: 81 percent satisfaction._

• *Mathew Greenwald & Associates for the Employee Benefit Research Institute, Aug. 2008*. "Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following aspects of your health care. ... Quality of health care I receive through my (health insurance) plan." 31 percent extremely satisfied, 41 percent very satisfied, 23 somewhat satisfied. _Total: 95 percent satisfaction._

• *Mathew Greenwald & Associates for the Employee Benefit Research Institute, Aug. 2008*. "Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following aspects of your health care. ... Overall satisfaction with my health (insurance) care plan." 23 percent extremely satisfied, 38 percent very satisfied, 30 percent somewhat satisfied. _Total: 91 percent satisfaction._

• *Mathew Greenwald & Associates for the Employee Benefit Research Institute, May 2008*. "Overall, how satisfied are you with your current health insurance plan?" 17 percent extremely satisfied, 36 percent very satisfied, 33 percent somewhat satisfied. _Total: 86 percent satisfaction._

If you average these eight scores, the total rate of satisfaction is 87 percent. In all but one poll, the satisfaction level was below Will's stated level of 95 percent.

One poll, taken five months before Obama was inaugurated, did come up with 95 percent satisfaction. But alone among these eight polls, that survey asked participants about the "quality of health care I receive through my (health insurance) plan." While we decided that the wording was close enough to merit inclusion on our list, the modest difference in satisfaction levels may stem from the way the question was phrased. Many people feel more warmly toward their doctors than they do toward their insurers.

So, while one poll with unique wording pegged satisfaction at 95 percent, the average of all relevant polls over a two-year period was eight points lower than what Will cited. However, Will is correct that the levels of satisfaction with one's own health insurance are consistently high. Indeed, they're extraordinarily high, when one considers how rarely surveys find such high levels of agreement among Americans. Since Will portrayed the larger point accurately, even while modestly overstating the number, we rate his comment Mostly True.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ays-95-percent-people-health-insurance-are-s/



In your face, booooyyyyyyeeeeeee!!!!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...



1." You claimed 90 percent of Americans liked their health insurance, no link was provided. It's also irrelevant considering you're claim is that Obamacare sucks because the government interferes in the free market."

You should learn to believe what I say....if you are capable of learning.

"When we started this health care debate a year ago, 85 percent of the American people had health insurance, and 95 percent of the 85 percent were happy with it."
— George Will on Sunday, February 21st, 2010 in a roundtable segment on ABC's This Week"
Will says that 95 percent of people with health insurance are satisfied with it PolitiFact



Here's what we found, poll by poll, in reverse chronological order:

• *Quinnipiac University, Sept. 2009*. "How satisfied are you with your health insurance plan?" 54 percent very satisfied, 34 percent somewhat._Total: 88 percent satisfaction_.

• *Quinnipiac University, June 2009*. "How satisfied are you with your health insurance plan?" 49 percent very satisfied, 36 somewhat satisfied._Total: 85 percent satisfaction_.

• *ABC News/Washington Post, June 2009*. "For each specific item I name, please tell me whether you are very satisfied with it, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. ... Your health insurance coverage." 42 percent very satisfied, 39 percent somewhat satisfied. T_otal: 81 percent satisfaction._

• *Mathew Greenwald & Associates for the Employee Benefit Research Institute, May 2009*. "Overall, how satisfied are you with your current health insurance plan?" 21 percent extremely satisfied, 37 percent very satisfied, 30 percent somewhat satisfied. _Total: 88 percent satisfaction_.

• *ABC News/Washington Post, June 2009*. "For each specific item I name, please tell me whether you are very satisfied with it, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. ... Your health insurance coverage." 42 percent very satisfied, 39 percent somewhat satisfied. _Total: 81 percent satisfaction._

• *Mathew Greenwald & Associates for the Employee Benefit Research Institute, Aug. 2008*. "Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following aspects of your health care. ... Quality of health care I receive through my (health insurance) plan." 31 percent extremely satisfied, 41 percent very satisfied, 23 somewhat satisfied. _Total: 95 percent satisfaction._

• *Mathew Greenwald & Associates for the Employee Benefit Research Institute, Aug. 2008*. "Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following aspects of your health care. ... Overall satisfaction with my health (insurance) care plan." 23 percent extremely satisfied, 38 percent very satisfied, 30 percent somewhat satisfied. _Total: 91 percent satisfaction._

• *Mathew Greenwald & Associates for the Employee Benefit Research Institute, May 2008*. "Overall, how satisfied are you with your current health insurance plan?" 17 percent extremely satisfied, 36 percent very satisfied, 33 percent somewhat satisfied. _Total: 86 percent satisfaction._

If you average these eight scores, the total rate of satisfaction is 87 percent. In all but one poll, the satisfaction level was below Will's stated level of 95 percent.

One poll, taken five months before Obama was inaugurated, did come up with 95 percent satisfaction. But alone among these eight polls, that survey asked participants about the "quality of health care I receive through my (health insurance) plan." While we decided that the wording was close enough to merit inclusion on our list, the modest difference in satisfaction levels may stem from the way the question was phrased. Many people feel more warmly toward their doctors than they do toward their insurers.

So, while one poll with unique wording pegged satisfaction at 95 percent, the average of all relevant polls over a two-year period was eight points lower than what Will cited. However, Will is correct that the levels of satisfaction with one's own health insurance are consistently high. Indeed, they're extraordinarily high, when one considers how rarely surveys find such high levels of agreement among Americans. Since Will portrayed the larger point accurately, even while modestly overstating the number, we rate his comment Mostly True.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ays-95-percent-people-health-insurance-are-s/



In your face, booooyyyyyyeeeeeee!!!!


forkup said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...




"No you are trying to make that case by trying to disqualify all deaths by accident or homicide. they call that cherry picking data.'

I still claim so.

How do you claim that deaths due to homicide or automobile accidents are attributable to healthcare?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

MadChemist said:


> It seems that all these threads devolve into the same structure of argument, name calling, and accusations.
> 
> I have to ask....
> 
> ...




The most basic disagreement is whether the law of the land, the US Constitution, authorized insurance of any kind.

I direct your attention to article 1, section 8, which is definitive for this question.


----------



## forkup (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> forkup said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Simple give me a higher survivability rate after


PoliticalChic said:


> forkup said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


In my face lol. 
-You have provided me with POLLS that rate your health insurance satisfactory prior Obamacare. But you did misrepresent it to begin with. You claimed 90 percent of Americans liked their insurance. The link says this,
Will says that 95 percent of people *WITH* health insurance, like it.
Important difference since ACA insured people who previously didn't.
I and even you have provided links that its below par most other industrialized nations. How does that help your case?
-https://www.healthline.com/health/leading-causes-of-death#15 
You will find that homicide or accidental death isn't high in the leading causes of death in the US
nor is it in my country so explain why a small percentage of the causes of death have such a profound effect on the general life expectancy. Again you misrepresent data.
- I also notice you completely gave up on trying to compare your healthcare to mine. 
*As usual you try to find little things to question so you don't have to answer the merit of your claim. Government interference decreases healthcare.*


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...





Is English a second language for you????

Or....are you a simpleton?

I misrepresented nothing.

"-You have provided me with POLLS that rate your* health insurance *satisfactory prior Obamacare. But you did misrepresent it to begin with. You claimed 90 percent of Americans liked their *insurance.* The link says this,
Will says that 95 percent of people *WITH* *health insurance*, like it."


----------



## forkup (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...





PoliticalChic said:


> life expectancy at birth for the United States over this period was 75.3 years, compared to 78.7 years for Japan, 78.0 years for Iceland, and 77.7 years for Sweden. However, after accounting for the unusually high fatal-injury rates in the United States, the estimate of standardized life expectancy at birth is 76.9 years, which is higher than the estimates for any other OECD country."


 I also reread your post and this I find interesting. How is 76.9 higher then 78.7?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> forkup said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




You really don't have a first language, do you.

Your question was answered in the very link you quoted.

" However, after accounting for the unusually high fatal-injury rates in the United States, the estimate of standardized life expectancy at birth is 76.9 years, which is higher than the estimates for any other OECD country."


Doesn't your healthcare cover the problems you're having?


----------



## forkup (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> forkup said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Actually it's not, it's my third, what about you? How many do you speak?
 You don't see the glaring misrepresentation there. If before ACA about 90 percent of people like their insurance doesn't it stand to reason that if 16 million more people get insurance the absolute number of people who like their insurance will be higher?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...




Two.

English is my second language.

As for your three.....do you have any facility with any of them?
It isn't in evidence here.



You don't see the problem here?
"You claimed 90 percent of Americans liked their insurance. The link says this,
Will says that 95 percent of people *WITH* health insurance, like it."

Time for a refresher with RosettaStone, huh?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...




Two.

English is my second language.

As for your three.....do you have any facility with any of them?
It isn't in evidence here.



You don't see the problem here?
"You claimed 90 percent of Americans liked their insurance. The link says this,
Will says that 95 percent of people *WITH* health insurance, like it."

Time for a refresher with RosettaStone, huh?


----------



## forkup (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> forkup said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...


If Japans life expectancy is 78.7 and America's is 75.3 and you disqualify certain causes of death, causes btw I've looked up only rate at the most 2 percent of possible causes. How does only 1 of the 2 numbers go up? That's not how disqualifying works. And it went up to a number lower then Japans so the statement is unsustainable.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2017)

forkup said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > forkup said:
> ...




Two.

English is my second language.

As for your three.....do you have any facility with any of them?
It isn't in evidence here.



You don't see the problem here?
"You claimed 90 percent of Americans liked their insurance. The link says this,
Will says that 95 percent of people *WITH* health insurance, like it."

Time for a refresher with RosettaStone, huh?


----------



## forkup (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> forkup said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Here's a link to an interesting study. It even confirms some of your points. I do however suggest that you read the conclusion and note that in no part of the study is there the slightest suggestion that government run programs perform worse then private ones, in fact the conclusion is a clear call for the opposite.Why do Americans have shorter life expectancy and worse health than people in other high-income countries?


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> MadChemist said:
> 
> 
> > It seems that all these threads devolve into the same structure of argument, name calling, and accusations.
> ...



I agree that it is a major argument.

Getting back to characterizing the system.

I am saying that we don't have the same quality of health care in all parts of the country. 

So, it is difficult for me to hear someone say the U.S. is better than Japan (or worse).

You could take a more segmented approach and compare the better states in the country and it might be better than Japan.

You could also find out what the difference is between the best and worst states (or counties).

You could try to do the same for Japan.


----------



## francoHFW (Oct 13, 2017)

This isn't corporate welfare for insurers, super dupes, it's help for poor workers and lower middle-class workers to get insurance... Subsidies that makes Insurance affordable. Kiss It Goodbye in 2019, not to mention people with pre-existing conditions being able to get insurance. Great job dupes just like the bad old days...


----------



## Leo123 (Oct 13, 2017)

francoHFW said:


> This isn't corporate welfare for insurers, super dupes, it's help for poor workers and lower middle-class workers to get insurance... Subsidies that makes Insurance affordable. Kiss It Goodbye in 2019, not to mention people with pre-existing conditions being able to get insurance. Great job dupes just like the bad old days...



Help for 'poor workers' will never come in the form of any government assistance.  Rescinding stupid government programs and regulations (especially on corporations who actually hire people) will do more than any government program could ever do or has done.


----------



## francoHFW (Oct 14, 2017)

Leo123 said:


> francoHFW said:
> 
> 
> > This isn't corporate welfare for insurers, super dupes, it's help for poor workers and lower middle-class workers to get insurance... Subsidies that makes Insurance affordable. Kiss It Goodbye in 2019, not to mention people with pre-existing conditions being able to get insurance. Great job dupes just like the bad old days...
> ...


You are a brainwashed functional moron


----------



## dblack (Oct 14, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Hey, I'd be happy to go to Single Payer, and just be done with it.




I suspect you'd be happy to go to straight up totalitarian government, and be done with it. But not everyone gets a hard on watching Nazi movies.


----------



## dblack (Oct 14, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> But why should health care be linked to employment to start with?



Because ambitious politicians, employers and labor leaders all agreed it was a great way to control people.


----------



## dblack (Oct 14, 2017)

francoHFW said:


> This isn't corporate welfare for insurers, super dupes, it's help for poor workers and lower middle-class workers to get insurance.


Then why is it funneled through the insurance companies? You know they take a cut, right?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 14, 2017)

dblack said:


> I suspect you'd be happy to go to straight up totalitarian government, and be done with it. But not everyone gets a hard on watching Nazi movies.



Yes, the government providing you health care rather than an insurance company cheating you out of health care is just like the Nazis... 



dblack said:


> Because ambitious politicians, employers and labor leaders all agreed it was a great way to control people.



Yup... just love that Libertarian Paranoia.. It's the delusions of grandeur combined with fear that everyone is out to get them.


----------



## Leo123 (Oct 14, 2017)

francoHFW said:


> Leo123 said:
> 
> 
> > francoHFW said:
> ...



The liberal government supports dysfunctional morons.    Like you.


----------



## dblack (Oct 14, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > I suspect you'd be happy to go to straight up totalitarian government, and be done with it. But not everyone gets a hard on watching Nazi movies.
> ...



It's history, numbnuts. Do some reading.


----------



## debbiedowner (Oct 14, 2017)

dblack said:


> francoHFW said:
> 
> 
> > This isn't corporate welfare for insurers, super dupes, it's help for poor workers and lower middle-class workers to get insurance.
> ...



How do you think we take our 2 million dollar bonus? I now can only look forward to a million this year, yea thanks, trump. I won't be able to provide food and shoes for my 18 kids, just what the hell am I going to tell them?


----------



## dblack (Oct 14, 2017)

debbiedowner said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > francoHFW said:
> ...



?? Did you cross post or something? Is this in response to my post, or someone else's?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 14, 2017)

dblack said:


> It's history, numbnuts. Do some reading.



Um, yeah, so I'm still not seeing how Universal Health Care leads to dictatorship...  

again, Libertarians are funny. Where would you be without the Koch Brothers to tell you what to think?


----------



## debbiedowner (Oct 14, 2017)

dblack said:


> debbiedowner said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



Hell, I don't know there are tears in my eyes my kids just asked, no gucci's this year?   No, you'll have to get your shoes at walmart I said no to all 18. Then they asked no Kobe beef from Japan and I said no we'll have to eat at Golden Corral. I told them to thank trump.


----------



## dblack (Oct 14, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > It's history, numbnuts. Do some reading.
> ...



Not near as funny as a "little dictator".


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 14, 2017)

dblack said:


> Not near as funny as a "little dictator".



Whatever, guy.  You Liberetards think stop lights are oppressing you.


----------



## dblack (Oct 14, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Not near as funny as a "little dictator".
> ...



Seriously though, have you ever met an authoritarian law you didn't like?


----------



## debbiedowner (Oct 14, 2017)

The man has got me down.


----------



## dblack (Oct 14, 2017)

debbiedowner said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > debbiedowner said:
> ...



Uh... are suggesting that I'm complaining because rich people will pay more taxes? Because that's not my issue with ACA. My beef with ACA is that, apart from being blatant violation of individual liberty, it funnels taxpayer money to the insurance industry.


----------



## debbiedowner (Oct 14, 2017)

dblack said:


> debbiedowner said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



Did you bother to read the link? Do you make over $200,000 a year?  If so the people thank you. If not, oh well.


----------



## debbiedowner (Oct 14, 2017)

dblack said:


> debbiedowner said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



Oh, you don't have to indulge in a health insurance policy. Maybe one of the new association plans may serve you better.


----------



## dblack (Oct 14, 2017)

debbiedowner said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > debbiedowner said:
> ...



What are you even talking about?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 14, 2017)

dblack said:


> Seriously though, have you ever met an authoritarian law you didn't like?



Quite a few... but i'm still waiting for you to explain how Government Health Care is "authoritarian". 

The problem with you Liberetards is that you want all the benefits of living in civilization and none of the burdens.  Life doesn't work like that.


----------



## francoHFW (Oct 14, 2017)

dblack said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...


Not Healthcare.!!!


----------



## francoHFW (Oct 14, 2017)

dblack said:


> debbiedowner said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...


That's why it's a republican plan a compromise by the Democrats that the Dupes never hear about...


----------



## dblack (Oct 14, 2017)

francoHFW said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > debbiedowner said:
> ...



What? What a weird thread. It's likes a bunch of schizophrenics conversing.


----------



## francoHFW (Oct 14, 2017)

dblack said:


> francoHFW said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...


Obamacare is based on the plan the Republicans always put up whenever the dams Democrats tried to reform Healthcare. They're just full of s***... They love our non system where their crony big health big Pharma etc etc keeps scamming the country and you, dupe. Obamacare could work if given a chance without GOP sabotage and with tinkering... And mainly without the usual total BS GOP propaganda...


----------



## debbiedowner (Oct 14, 2017)

francoHFW said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > francoHFW said:
> ...



I know I know it was Newt the spook that came up with an individual mandate.


----------



## debbiedowner (Oct 14, 2017)

dblack said:


> debbiedowner said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



I am sorry had to take my 18 kids to band competition this afternoon and then inform them afterwards because of the bonus cuts the pure gold instruments would have to go next year and only could afford three of them to even play in the band next year. Then I told them we'd probably only be able to eat once a week instead of 7 and to boot we'd have to at McDonalds, my youngest said, "what's a McDonalds daddy with tears in his eyes" ? I said it is a place that has happy meals and our President now wanted us to eat happy meals. Damn it life sucks but I guess I'll get a 2nd job just to pay for Mauds (my wife's) hysterectomy because we don't need any more of those damn kids. The future without all the obammy-trump care sign ups just won't be there anymore.


----------



## dblack (Oct 15, 2017)

francoHFW said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > francoHFW said:
> ...



You're so fixated Democrats vs Republicans thing. Do you have any political convictions beyond that shitshow?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 15, 2017)

Let's see if they can compete in an open market.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 15, 2017)

Let's see if they can compete in an open market.


----------



## dblack (Oct 15, 2017)

francoHFW said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > francoHFW said:
> ...



You're so fixated on the Democrats vs Republicans thing. Do you have any political convictions beyond that freak show?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 15, 2017)

dblack just described himself.


----------



## francoHFW (Oct 15, 2017)

dblack said:


> francoHFW said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...


Democrats are right on the facts and on the issues and policy... The Republicans just keep getting more wrong


----------



## dblack (Oct 15, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously though, have you ever met an authoritarian law you didn't like?
> ...



It takes away each individual's right to decide for themselves how to take care of their health and replaces it with government mandates.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 15, 2017)

dblack said:


> It takes away each individual's right to decide for themselves how to take care of their health and replaces it with government mandates.



Considering the rest of us have to pick up the slack when they don't, um, yeah.  We need mandates.


----------



## dblack (Oct 15, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > It takes away each individual's right to decide for themselves how to take care of their health and replaces it with government mandates.
> ...



That's one point of view. There are others. That's what I don't get about your perspective. You always seem to assume that you'll agree with the government, but what about when you don't? What about when the mandates are coming from douchebags like Trump?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 15, 2017)

dblack said:


> That's one point of view. There are others. That's what I don't get about your perspective. You always seem to assume that you'll agree with the government, but what about when you don't? What about when the mandates are coming from douchebags like Trump?



Then I'll fight them on the merits, stupid.  

What I don't go in is with this crazy Liberertard idea that a government mandate is necessarily a bad thing to start with.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 15, 2017)

Government mandates are not necessarily bad things.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 15, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Hey, I'd be happy to go to Single Payer, and just be done with it.
> 
> But you guys insisted that we not leave the Insurance Companies behind.
> 
> ...


/----/ Single payer = Rationed care. Only Libtards like the idea.
Buyer Beware: The Failure of Single-Payer Health Care


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 15, 2017)

^^^


----------



## dblack (Oct 15, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > That's one point of view. There are others. That's what I don't get about your perspective. You always seem to assume that you'll agree with the government, but what about when you don't? What about when the mandates are coming from douchebags like Trump?
> ...


Of course not all government mandates are bad. But they do limit freedom. Sometimes that's necessary. We can't have people deciding for themselves whether murder is OK, for example. We depend on government to enforce conformity on such matters.

But when it's not necessary, we should avoid using the state to force conformity on society. We need laws preventing assault, theft and fraud. But we don't need government mandating conformity on matters of personal health. People have different values and different ideas about what's best for themselves and their families. The government should be protecting our rights to make these kinds of decisions freely, not mandating conformity to to suit the interests of their favorite lobbyists.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 15, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ Single payer = Rationed care. Only Libtards like the idea.



As opposed to our current system, where it is rationed by your wealth. 

Hey, here's an idea, if the rich and poor got EXACTLY the same level of treatment, I bet you we'd improve the level of care for the poor.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 15, 2017)

dblack said:


> But when it's not necessary, we should avoid using the state to force conformity on society. We need laws preventing assault, theft and fraud. But we don't need government mandating conformity on matters of personal health. People have different values and different ideas about what's best for themselves and their families. The government should be protecting our rights to make these kinds of decisions freely, not mandating conformity to to suit the interests of their favorite lobbyists.



Actually, the thing is, I'm tired of paying for your negligence... that's the thing.  

The LIbertarians don't say, "Well, I bought a shitty policy or no policy, I guess I'll just die now!"  Nope, they find someone to take care of them and make sure the cost gets passed on to the rest of us.


----------



## dblack (Oct 15, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > But when it's not necessary, we should avoid using the state to force conformity on society. We need laws preventing assault, theft and fraud. But we don't need government mandating conformity on matters of personal health. People have different values and different ideas about what's best for themselves and their families. The government should be protecting our rights to make these kinds of decisions freely, not mandating conformity to to suit the interests of their favorite lobbyists.
> ...



I'm not asking you to. Libertarians aren't asking you to. If stinginess is what's driving you, let's repeal the laws that are forcing you to help others against your will. That'd be more to the point than giving government control over 20% of our economy.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 15, 2017)

Libertarians privatize their profit and socialize the risk on the rest of us.

No, simply, no.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 15, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ Single payer = Rationed care. Only Libtards like the idea.
> ...


/—-/ If, if, if. if your Aunt had a dic, she’d be your uncle.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 15, 2017)

If the Far Right had a patriotic bone, they would not be anti-American.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 16, 2017)

dblack said:


> I'm not asking you to. Libertarians aren't asking you to. If stinginess is what's driving you, let's repeal the laws that are forcing you to help others against your will. That'd be more to the point than giving government control over 20% of our economy.



Except you guys wouldn't go along with that.  You'll show up at the emergency rooms and still stiff the rest of us with the bill.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 16, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...



Duly noted you didn't have an argument. 

So what bothers you is the thought that poor people can get the same class of care you get, eh?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 16, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Poor poor Joe, I was an avionics technician for over 15 years, collected a large sum of money(all legally) avoided paying taxes while overseas, and came back here participating in the stock market amassing an even larger fortune.
> ...


Have you been peeking over the stall Joe?  It is only 12 inches when it is limp but double that, at its full length.  My wife, who i have been married to for  30 years, could of been a model, but didn't want to, because she didn't want to have to suck some liberals dick(like Harvey Weinstein) to be one.  Nope I don't do German(union) engineering, as the Japanese(non union) are much better with their cars, so I have a Lexus and Toyota Limited Edition Highlander. 
But Joe since you have been a victim of liberalism almost all your life, you have your 1 house , probably because you had welfare help for that, and you inherited the other one, because you Dad actually worked for it.
Any liberal who says they aren't wealth envious is a typical liberal liar, because they(liberals) always take the easy way out and put very little effort to try to achieve the 1% but never do, while bitching that the 1%er's stole their(liberals) money.  Liberals are the dumbest people in the universe.


----------



## dblack (Oct 16, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not asking you to. Libertarians aren't asking you to. If stinginess is what's driving you, let's repeal the laws that are forcing you to help others against your will. That'd be more to the point than giving government control over 20% of our economy.
> ...


Listen, if that's your gripe, just repeal EMTALA. Pay for your own health care and stop trying to force your insecurities off on other people.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 16, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


/—-/ No, you’re too dense to recognize my argument which is, you want to destroy our healthcare system and replace it with a one size fits all proven failure on the hopes the rich will demand it be improved. I forget you are a Libtard Moonbat and everything has to be dumbed down for you. My bad.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 16, 2017)

cellblock is incorrect, yet again.

National health care in the industrialized west is cheaper, more accessible, and people live longer and healthier lives.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 16, 2017)

JakeStarkey said:


> cellblock is incorrect, yet again.
> 
> National health care in the industrialized west is cheaper, more accessible, and people live longer and healthier lives.


/----/ Actually I'm 100% correct.
Buyer Beware: The Failure of Single-Payer Health Care

The head of trauma care at Vancouver's largest hospital announces that they turn away more cases than any other center in North America. He's quoted as saying this would be unheard of in the United States.

In Manitoba, which is my former home province, the premier--the political equivalent of a governor--concedes that his pledge to end hallway medicine has fallen short. Hallway medicine is the phenomenon where the emergency rooms are so filled with patients that people are forced to lie on stretchers in hallways, often for days. Overcrowding is a periodic problem. In fact, the overcrowding is worse than last year. The community is rocked by the death of a 74-year old man who had waited in the emergency room for three hours and had not been seen.

New Brunswick announces that they will send cancer patients south to the United States for radiation therapy. New Brunswick, a small maritime province, is the seventh to publicly announce its plans to send patients south. In the best health care system in the world, the vast majority of provinces now rely on American health care to provide radiation therapy. Provinces do this because the clinically recommended waiting time for treatment is often badly exceeded. Ordinarily, oncologists suggest that there should be a two-week gap between the initial consult by the family doctor and the referral to the oncologist, and then two weeks more from the oncologist to the commencement of radiation therapy. In most Canadian provinces, we exceed that by one to two months, sometimes three.

In Alberta earlier this year, a young man dies because of the profound emergency room overcrowding. He is 23. On a winter's night, he develops pain in his flank and goes to the local emergency room. It is so crowded that he grows impatient and goes to another. There, he waits six hours. No one sees him. Exhausted and frustrated, he goes home. The pain continues, so he finally decides to go to the local community hospital. It's too late: His appendix ruptured. He dies from the complications hours later.
Those are some of the examples of the cruelty of what goes on in Canada. But they don't give you the flavor of the insanity--and I'll use that term in a nonprofessional sense--of the Canadian system.

MRI scanners are very difficult to get in Canada. There are long wait times. In my book, I talk about a political struggle on Vancouver Island where the wait time for a non-urgent MRI scan was over a year--"non-urgent" being defined by government officials, not by physicians. In the province I now live in, Ontario, there are long wait times for MRIs.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 16, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Have you been peeking over the stall Joe? It is only 12 inches when it is limp but double that, at its full length. My wife, who i have been married to for 30 years, could of been a model, but didn't want to, because she didn't want to have to suck some liberals dick(like Harvey Weinstein) to be one.



Wow, Barbie, you must have a tiny ego to make all this shit up.



andaronjim said:


> Nope I don't do German(union) engineering, as the Japanese(non union) are much better with their cars, so I have a Lexus and Toyota Limited Edition Highlander.



Uh, dude, the Japanese have unions... They have unions that are stronger than the UAW.  They can even get rid of the CEO if they want to. 

JAW



andaronjim said:


> But Joe since you have been a victim of liberalism almost all your life, you have your 1 house , probably because you had welfare help for that, and you inherited the other one, because you Dad actually worked for it.



Naw, dude, I paid for my first house and the second one costs me a good deal of money to maintain even though I only get up there once a year because I'm usually too busy working two jobs. 



andaronjim said:


> Any liberal who says they aren't wealth envious is a typical liberal liar, because they(liberals) always take the easy way out and put very little effort to try to achieve the 1% but never do, while bitching that the 1%er's stole their(liberals) money. Liberals are the dumbest people in the universe.



Frankly, I've met the one percent. They are generally awful people and I have no desire to be like them.  

But the fact is, the wealth isn't distributed in a fair manner, and anyone with a lick of sense realizes that.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 16, 2017)

dblack said:


> Of course not all government mandates are bad. But they do limit freedom. Sometimes that's necessary. We can't have people deciding for themselves whether murder is OK, for example. We depend on government to enforce conformity on such matters.
> 
> But when it's not necessary, we should avoid using the state to force conformity on society. We need laws preventing assault, theft and fraud. But we don't need government mandating conformity on matters of personal health. People have different values and different ideas about what's best for themselves and their families. The government should be protecting our rights to make these kinds of decisions freely, not mandating conformity to to suit the interests of their favorite lobbyists.



Yeah, we kind of do, because of people's irresponsibility. 

Now, you see, most places REQUIRE you to have auto insurance if you drive a car. I haven't had an auto accident since 2004, but I still pay a decently high rate for the privilage of driving a car. 

The problem with those who CHOOSE to be uninsured is that their negligence costs the rest of us money.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 16, 2017)

dblack said:


> Listen, if that's your gripe, just repeal EMTALA. Pay for your own health care and stop trying to force your insecurities off on other people.



No, we aren't going to repeal EMTALA.  It's a good law. 

What we need is single payer.  

THE REST OF THE WORLD HAS FIGURED THIS OUT!!!!! 

But being AMericans, we just scratch our heads and say 'Um, freedom' and don't do the obvious fix.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 16, 2017)

heritage.org ignores the latest cumulative research on nationalized health care in the West, and OVERWHELMINGLY those citizens pay less, access more care, and live longer and more healthily than Americans.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 16, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Listen, if that's your gripe, just repeal EMTALA. Pay for your own health care and stop trying to force your insecurities off on other people.
> ...


The obvious fix for Joe????

Moonbattery: Psychiatrist Confirms: Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder


> Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded. Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave.





> The roots of liberalism — and its associated madness — can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind. When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious.


 Give up all your rights to the government so the liberal elites can do all the thinking for you.  No fucking thank you Joe, just because you are dingbat and need others to change your depends, doesn't mean the rest of US do.  Please, leave for Cuba and live your Socialist Utopian Dream there, the rest of US want to be FREE.....dumbass.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 16, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Have you been peeking over the stall Joe? It is only 12 inches when it is limp but double that, at its full length. My wife, who i have been married to for 30 years, could of been a model, but didn't want to, because she didn't want to have to suck some liberals dick(like Harvey Weinstein) to be one.
> ...


/----/ "But the fact is, the wealth isn't distributed in a fair manner, and anyone with a lick of sense realizes that."   What a load of liberal bullshyt. Since when is wealth supposed to be distributed in any manner?  NO one would work and why should they if it's just taken away from them.  As workers used to say in the USSR, "We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us."


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 16, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Listen, if that's your gripe, just repeal EMTALA. Pay for your own health care and stop trying to force your insecurities off on other people.
> ...


/----/ So you choose to bury your head in the sand and ignore the failures of socialized or single payer.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 16, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> 
> Dems rip Trump's 'spiteful' decision to end key ObamaCare payments
> 
> ...


The right wing has nothing but repeal, not fine capital plans that cause Labor to command market clearing wages for public sector goods and services.  A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage is a start.  Twenty-five dollars an hour may not be unreasonable, if Labor is expected to try to conform to rational choice theory under our form of Capitalism.


----------



## dblack (Oct 16, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Listen, if that's your gripe, just repeal EMTALA. Pay for your own health care and stop trying to force your insecurities off on other people.
> ...



Then I call bullshit on your complaint about paying for freeloaders.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 16, 2017)

danielpalos said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> ...


/----/ We're still waiting for you Libtards to open your own small business so we can see how much you pay your employees. TICK TOCK TICK TOCK


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 16, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


I still am laughing my ass off, that liberals are defending the Corporate Welfare that Obama promised the EVIL insurance companies, that make obscene profits... Who would ever think...(well not a liberal for sure)...


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 16, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Give up all your rights to the government so the liberal elites can do all the thinking for you. No fucking thank you Joe, just because you are dingbat and need others to change your depends, doesn't mean the rest of US do. Please, leave for Cuba and live your Socialist Utopian Dream there, the rest of US want to be FREE.....dumbass.



Uh, Barbie, why don't you actually have the discussion at hand instead of whining about "communism" every time you get bitch-slapped on an argument? 

I'd rather have my health care run by a government that lives in fear I can vote it out of office than one run by a greedy corporation that has no obligation to provide me good service once they have my money. 



Cellblock2429 said:


> "But the fact is, the wealth isn't distributed in a fair manner, and anyone with a lick of sense realizes that." What a load of liberal bullshyt. Since when is wealth supposed to be distributed in any manner? NO one would work and why should they if it's just taken away from them. As workers used to say in the USSR, "We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us."



Did anyone in the USSR actually say that, or did some propagandist make that up? 

What is wealth? Wealth is the measure of the value of all goods and services provided by the labor of people. 

So the fact is, the bottom 40% of the country has less than 1% of the wealth?  Did they do less than 1% of the labor? Certainly not. 

The top 1% has 43% of the wealth?  Did they do 43% of the labor?  

Or as this "Communist' said...


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 16, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ So you choose to bury your head in the sand and ignore the failures of socialized or single payer.



What failures?  

Oh, that's right. They let Charlie the Meat Puppet die.  Oh, gosh.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 16, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Give up all your rights to the government so the liberal elites can do all the thinking for you. No fucking thank you Joe, just because you are dingbat and need others to change your depends, doesn't mean the rest of US do. Please, leave for Cuba and live your Socialist Utopian Dream there, the rest of US want to be FREE.....dumbass.
> ...


The  same government that runs the post office and DMV?

Joe, once again, I have to bring up how much of a wealth envious tard you are.  I was out of high school bottom of the rung 99%er making minimum wage.  While you sat back being a victim of liberalism, I got skills and knowledge and with those are now a well hung 1%er.  While you want to take what is mine and make it yours, that if fucking communism you worthless fuck....


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 16, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ So you choose to bury your head in the sand and ignore the failures of socialized or single payer.
> ...


/----/ You're ignoring the reports I posted about the failures of single payer.  Have you ever considered SP may not be the ideal solution you think it is?


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 16, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Give up all your rights to the government so the liberal elites can do all the thinking for you. No fucking thank you Joe, just because you are dingbat and need others to change your depends, doesn't mean the rest of US do. Please, leave for Cuba and live your Socialist Utopian Dream there, the rest of US want to be FREE.....dumbass.
> ...


/----/ So you think the guy who sweeps the floor or assembles the widgets the owner of the company designed, developed and invested in deserve the same pay? Is that how you think things should work?  If so, then the owner will say, WHY BOTHER?  Then he and all the workers will be out of work. You simpleton.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 16, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


/----/ When Obozocare as shoved down our throats in 2010, the Libtards who hated insurance companies for decades suddenly embraced the subsidies and at the same time blasted corporate welfare. It was bizzare to debate them.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 16, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Give up all your rights to the government so the liberal elites can do all the thinking for you. No fucking thank you Joe, just because you are dingbat and need others to change your depends, doesn't mean the rest of US do. Please, leave for Cuba and live your Socialist Utopian Dream there, the rest of US want to be FREE.....dumbass.
> ...


/----/ The principle of the state capitalism of the period of transition to communism: the authorities pretend they are paying wages, workers pretend they are working. Alternatively, "So long as the bosses pretend to pay us, we will pretend to work." This joke persisted essentially unchanged through the 1980s.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 16, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Of course not all government mandates are bad. But they do limit freedom. Sometimes that's necessary. We can't have people deciding for themselves whether murder is OK, for example. We depend on government to enforce conformity on such matters.
> ...


/----/ "Now, you see, most places REQUIRE you to have auto insurance if you drive a car. I haven't had an auto accident since 2004, but I still pay a decently high rate for the privilage of driving a car. "    For crying out loud Joe, the only insurance you are compelled to buy is liability to protect others that you may harm in an accident. Unless you have a loan on your car, you are not forced to buy Fire, Theft and Collision. Once you own the car outright, you only have to have liability.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 16, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> The same government that runs the post office and DMV?



Those things run pretty well.  My mail always gets delivered.  Last time I was at the DMV in 2014, they had me out of there in less than 10 minutes. 

Less frustrating than dealing with Comcast or any airline I've had to ride recently. 



andaronjim said:


> Joe, once again, I have to bring up how much of a wealth envious tard you are. I was out of high school bottom of the rung 99%er making minimum wage. While you sat back being a victim of liberalism, I got skills and knowledge and with those are now a well hung 1%er.



Sure you are.. Because clearly angry racists are always really successful. 

I'm sure you got promoted to Head Possum Catcher last month, Barbie. 

Now, I'm going to talk to the adults for a while.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 16, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ You're ignoring the reports I posted about the failures of single payer. Have you ever considered SP may not be the ideal solution you think it is?



No, I haven't considered that, because for the most part, they get better results than we do in terms of metrics and spend a lot less money doing it.  

But, but, but... Charlie Gard!  They only kept his corpse alive for four months!   



Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ So you think the guy who sweeps the floor or assembles the widgets the owner of the company designed, developed and invested in deserve the same pay? Is that how you think things should work? If so, then the owner will say, WHY BOTHER? Then he and all the workers will be out of work. You simpleton.



Do I htink they should make the same?  No. Do I think the guy on the assembly line should make enough to take care of his family? Yes.  

Incidently, in most of the world, that is exactly how it works. 

_U.S. CEOs earn from 400 to 500 times the median salary for workers. For CEOs in the U.K., the ratio is 22; in France, it's 15; and in Germany it's 12._
_
CEO Compensation in the US Vs. the World
_


Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ The principle of the state capitalism of the period of transition to communism: the authorities pretend they are paying wages, workers pretend they are working. Alternatively, "So long as the bosses pretend to pay us, we will pretend to work." This joke persisted essentially unchanged through the 1980s.



So you have no proof anyone actually said this, then?  



Cellblock2429 said:


> For crying out loud Joe, the only insurance you are compelled to buy is liability to protect others that you may harm in an accident. Unless you have a loan on your car, you are not forced to buy Fire, Theft and Collision. Once you own the car outright, you only have to have liability.



Exactly.  

So with health insurance, if you aren't going to do the sensible thing and have single payer, then you should have everyone required to buy insurance, for the same reason everyone has to buy liability- so the cost of your problems don't get spread around to everyone else.


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 16, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> 
> Dems rip Trump's 'spiteful' decision to end key ObamaCare payments
> 
> ...


Healthcare costs are going to go up. Happy? Insurance companies won't insure the sick or old. Will you never get sick or old?


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 16, 2017)

Two Thumbs said:


> It's like the dnc openly bribed ins companies and their lackeys and got their sheep to cheer it on.
> 
> 
> billions added to the debt = meh


I'll agree the Aca was a gift to insurance companies. So was what trump did. They no longer have to insure sick and old people. You'll die penniless


----------



## Two Thumbs (Oct 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > It's like the dnc openly bribed ins companies and their lackeys and got their sheep to cheer it on.
> ...


good lord

Have you ever heard of medicare or Medicaid?


all I really care about is the forced participation, get rid of that and idc about the rest.


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 16, 2017)

Two Thumbs said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...


The way trumps going most of you will die penniless. I don't care anymore. Get rid of medicare


----------



## Two Thumbs (Oct 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


look at the debt, dying penniless has been in the works for a long time.


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 16, 2017)

Two Thumbs said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...


Enjoy. I no longer care. I'll live comfortably without it


----------



## Two Thumbs (Oct 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


No you won't.

the government, you love so much, will come for your money, in the name of 'fairness'.


----------



## Slyhunter (Oct 16, 2017)

We can't take from the rich and give to the poor without population control. It can't be a bottomless pit of need.


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 16, 2017)

Two Thumbs said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...


Sorry but the rich have ways around those things. Most people lose all their money because of healthcare problems. They never had the $5000 to pay a lawyer who would protect their life savings. We almost learned the hard way with my mom. They would have taken all of my mom and dads money. Now we got the money protected.

Most Americans will never go pay the $5000 and take their chances and lose everything. 

Then there's the masses who don't have anything. Future don't look good the next 20 years all the baby boomers


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

Slyhunter said:


> We can't take from the rich and give to the poor without population control. It can't be a bottomless pit of need.



We don't need to.  We just need to fairly distribute the wealth to start with. 

If we took the GDP and evenly distributed it, every man woman and child would get 55,000.  that's more than enough to live comfortably.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> ...


/—-/ I remember the good old days when libtards hated corporate welfare.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /—-/ I remember the good old days when libtards hated corporate welfare.



Hey, I'd be happy to get the insurance companies out of the mix and go to single payer.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...





JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /—-/ I remember the good old days when libtards hated corporate welfare.
> ...


/----/ Thanks but no thanks:
Pacific Research Institute |   Is The Horror Story Of Single-payer Health Care Coming Soon To A Theater Near You?
Consider the California Single Payer bill. An analysis by the state Senate’s Appropriations Committee found that the measure would cost $400 billion annually. That’s more than three times the state’s annual budget of $125 billion.

Single-payer systems aren’t just unaffordable. They deliver atrocious care.

In Canada’s single-payer system, patients wait weeks for medical attention. According to the Fraser Institute, a Canadian think tank, the median patient waits 20 weeks between referral from a general practitioner and receipt of treatment from a specialist. A 2014 study of 11 industrialized countries ranked Canada dead last in timeliness of care.

Consequently, many Canadians have to leave the country to get the care they need. In 2014, more than 52,000 Canadians received non-emergency medical treatment outside of Canada. In recent years, local health officials have authorized more than $100 million in spending to send Ontario patients waiting for critical transplants to U.S. hospitals.

In the United Kingdom’s government-run system, patients aren’t faring any better. In 2015, more than 130,000 patients did not receive timely cancer care. Between 2000 and 2015, the number of available hospital beds declined 20 percent.

Single-payer systems have consistently received poor reviews from those trapped in them. Once American audiences realize that, they’ll give progressive lawmakers’ pitches for single-payer a big thumbs-down.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> Consider the California Single Payer bill. An analysis by the state Senate’s Appropriations Committee found that the measure would cost $400 billion annually. That’s more than three times the state’s annual budget of $125 billion.
> 
> Single-payer systems aren’t just unaffordable. They deliver atrocious care.



Guy, the thing is, we ALREADY spend more than any other country on health care, with a lot of people making a profit. 

We spend 18% of our GDP on heath care, compared to most other industrialized countries that spend 8-11%.  

How do they spend less, they get rid of things like "payments to stockholders" and "Nine figure CEO Salaries".   



Cellblock2429 said:


> Consequently, many Canadians have to leave the country to get the care they need. In 2014, more than 52,000 Canadians received non-emergency medical treatment outside of Canada. In recent years, local health officials have authorized more than $100 million in spending to send Ontario patients waiting for critical transplants to U.S. hospitals.



That lie has been debunked.  

5 Myths About Canadian Health Care

_Myth #1: Canadians are flocking to the United States to get medical care.

How many times have you heard that Canadians, frustrated by long wait times and rationing where they live, come to the United States for medical care? 

I don’t deny that some well-off people might come to the United States for medical care. If I needed a heart or lung transplant, there’s no place I’d rather have it done. But for the vast, vast majority of people, that’s not happening.

The most comprehensive study I’ve seen on this topic — it employed three different methodologies, all with solid rationales behind them — was published in the peer-reviewed journal Health Affairs.

Source: “Phantoms in the Snow: Canadians’ Use of Health Care Services in the United States,” Health Affairs, May 2002.

The authors of the study started by surveying 136 ambulatory care facilities near the U.S.-Canada border in Michigan, New York and Washington. It makes sense that Canadians crossing the border for care would favor places close by, right? It turns out, however, that about 80 percent of such facilities saw, on average, fewer than one Canadian per month; about 40 percent had seen none in the preceding year._




Cellblock2429 said:


> In the United Kingdom’s government-run system, patients aren’t faring any better. In 2015, more than 130,000 patients did not receive timely cancer care. Between 2000 and 2015, the number of available hospital beds declined 20 percent.



Okay, let's look at this LIE.  From those Commie Bastards at Forbes, no less. 

U.S. Healthcare Ranked Dead Last Compared To 10 Other Countries

Turns out that many of those "other countries" (including France) score better than the U.S. in one key metric not included in Cadillac's TV spot — healthcare. At least that's according to The Commonwealth Fund in their latest report "_Mirror, Mirror On The Wall — 2014 Update_" (pdf here).

For this year's survey on overall health care, The Commonwealth Fund ranked the U.S. dead last .

1. United Kingdom
2. Switzerland
3. Sweden
4. Australia
5. Germany & Netherlands (tied)
7. New Zealand & Norway (tied)
9. France
10. Canada
11. United States

It's fairly well accepted that the U.S. is the most expensive healthcare system in the world, but many continue to falsely assume that we pay more for healthcare because we get better health (or better health outcomes). The evidence, however, clearly doesn't support that view.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ You're ignoring the reports I posted about the failures of single payer. Have you ever considered SP may not be the ideal solution you think it is?
> ...


Did you know that the Professional athletes who kneel to the national anthem make 400 to 500 times the median salary of the workers who buy their tickets?  Why do they get so much money?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > Consider the California Single Payer bill. An analysis by the state Senate’s Appropriations Committee found that the measure would cost $400 billion annually. That’s more than three times the state’s annual budget of $125 billion.
> ...


By the way, Joe is very envious of those that make a lot of money, if you haven't figured that out by now...


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...


/----/ We need wealth distribution in the NFL between players and fans.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...


/----/ Joe must be outraged over this wealth distribution inequality:
On average, NBA players make $5.15 million, MLB players make $3.2 million, NHL players make $2.4 million, and NFL players make $1.9 million per year, according to Forbes.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Did you know that the Professional athletes who kneel to the national anthem make 400 to 500 times the median salary of the workers who buy their tickets? Why do they get so much money?



Well, no, they don't.  

The highest NFL Salary is $27 million/Yr for Matthew Stafford. I don't know if he's taking a knee or not, but he's the highest. Most make a lot less. (actually, doing a bit of research, Stafford hasn't taken a stand on the protests and his wife has complained about them in the media)

The average NFL Salary is 2.1 Million. 

The NFL's Highest-Paid Players 2016

So, again- I KNOW you are math challenged, but the average American income is $*53,719*, although I suspect people who can afford to pay $300 to go to a Bears game probably make more than that, let's go with that as an average. 

So the AVERAGE NFL Player only makes 39 times what an average American makes.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


Don't forget Hollyweed elites and their millions that they make also, while charging those poor ticket holders up to 15 dollars for 1 movie...  How dare they!!!


----------



## dblack (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /—-/ I remember the good old days when libtards hated corporate welfare.
> ...



Medicare for all, eh? You think that will get insurance companies out of the mix? Think again. All that will do is secure their place at the feeding trough:



> 33. Medicare is a Private–Public Partnership || CMA
> 
> Most people think Medicare is a government program. That’s only partly true. While Congress created Medicare, and continues to develop Medicare coverage and appeal rules, decisions to pay claims are actually made by private companies. The government does not make those decisions. This was one of the compromises made in order to pass Medicare in 1965 – and the public-private partnership continues to date.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Did you know that the Professional athletes who kneel to the national anthem make 400 to 500 times the median salary of the workers who buy their tickets? Why do they get so much money?
> ...


Those players get $15,000 a minute played while some union guy makes $20 an hour.  No problem for you Joe?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Did you know that the Professional athletes who kneel to the national anthem make 400 to 500 times the median salary of the workers who buy their tickets? Why do they get so much money?
> ...


Joe why do you want the insurance companies to get that corporate welfare?  I could of sworn a while ago, you wanted all corporate welfare to stop?  Should evil rich companies be subsidized by the government or not?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ Joe must be outraged over this wealth distribution inequality:
> On average, NBA players make $5.15 million, MLB players make $3.2 million, NHL players make $2.4 million, and NFL players make $1.9 million per year, according to Forbes.



well, if you are all dumb enough to pay for it, that's on you. I mostly ignore sports.  

But let's look at that. The thing is, you never buy a product because Daddy Warbucks is the CEO.  You are buying the product made by the guy on the line, and how good is work is. 

When you go to a sporting event, you are going to see that player, and if he doesn't perform to standards, he gets traded off to another team pretty quickly.  

I should also point out that in a sports organization, the guys who aren't the "Stars" - the benchwarmers, the guys who work in the stadium, etc. are mostly unionized and bring home a pretty good salary.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


/----/ I think Joe is the type who follows soccer.  You know, that game that lasts for hours and the ending score is 0 - 0? That game where the fans gouge each other's eyes out?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Joe why do you want the insurance companies to get that corporate welfare? I could of sworn a while ago, you wanted all corporate welfare to stop? Should evil rich companies be subsidized by the government or not?



Why do you keep changing the subject when you get spanked? 

I've already stated my position on this subject. Single Payer, now.  

Now, if Trump breaks the system, that's all on him, but frankly, that'll probably make it easier to get Single Payer.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ Joe must be outraged over this wealth distribution inequality:
> ...


So Joe if you are dumb enough to by the stuff from a corporation, that's on you......


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Joe why do you want the insurance companies to get that corporate welfare? I could of sworn a while ago, you wanted all corporate welfare to stop? Should evil rich companies be subsidized by the government or not?
> ...


So Joe you are a Socialist/Communist/Marxist/Fascist/Liberal/Progressive, who wants Donald J. Trump to be in charge of your healthcare?? Now be honest....


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ I think Joe is the type who follows soccer. You know, that game that lasts for hours and the ending score is 0 - 0? That game where the fans gouge each other's eyes out?



Because... man, you hate Soccer, that's a socialist sport!!! 

Those damned commies!


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ Joe must be outraged over this wealth distribution inequality:
> ...


/----/ " The thing is, you never buy a product because Daddy Warbucks is the CEO."  What happened to Apple stock when they fired Steve Jobs? What happened to the stock when they hired him back?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ I think Joe is the type who follows soccer. You know, that game that lasts for hours and the ending score is 0 - 0? That game where the fans gouge each other's eyes out?
> ...


No, if people like Joe like the game of Soccer, that is just fine, because Joe wants America to be more like Europe.  Why else does he want the Evil Republicans and Donald Trump to be in charge of HIS healthcare..


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> So Joe you are a Socialist/Communist/Marxist/Fascist/Liberal/Progressive, who wants Donald J. Trump to be in charge of your healthcare?? Now be honest....



Wow, Barbie, is your English comprehension that poor?  

Look, the reality of Trump - or any president, for that matter - is that the functions of government will continue on pretty much unabated. The mail will get delivered, the roads will get built, entitlements, mostly going to white people, will be distributed.  

The whole point of this exercise is been to show just how little Trump can control it. He can't get his own party to repeal ObamaCare, so now he's going to sabotage it. 

This is the guy you voted for.  

But back to the point, given the choice between a government run program and one run by a greedy corporation, I'd go with the government program.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> No, if people like Joe like the game of Soccer, that is just fine, because Joe wants America to be more like Europe. Why else does he want the Evil Republicans and Donald Trump to be in charge of HIS healthcare..



In 10 years, the Republican party will be a regional party in the South. So I'm not that worried about it. 

Just not enough angry old white people to keep you afloat indefinitely.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ " The thing is, you never buy a product because Daddy Warbucks is the CEO." What happened to Apple stock when they fired Steve Jobs? What happened to the stock when they hired him back?



Are we talking about stock or product?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > So Joe you are a Socialist/Communist/Marxist/Fascist/Liberal/Progressive, who wants Donald J. Trump to be in charge of your healthcare?? Now be honest....
> ...


You say that Donald Trump is a pussy grabbing idiot, who shouldn't run this country, yet you want him to take over your healthcare.  Egad man, at least fucking man up that you really do want the Don because deep down you want him to grab your pussy...  ROTFLMAO.... Joe you are so funny...


----------



## dblack (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...



They don't seem to get that. They're all freaking out because Trump is taking away healthcare from people, and I'm like: "Saw that coming."

I think the main conceit of the statists is that they think government will always represent their interests. But unlike the market, democratic government only represents the _majority _of the people. In their utopia of unlimited democracy, if you aren't in the majority, you're fucked.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> You say that Donald Trump is a pussy grabbing idiot, who shouldn't run this country, yet you want him to take over your healthcare. Egad man, at least fucking man up that you really do want the Don because deep down you want him to grab your pussy... ROTFLMAO.... Joe you are so funny...



Again, by the time we get a single payer system, they'd have already frog marched Trump out of the White House for whatever impeachable offenses he committed. 

but duly noted you can't really argue the merits of the subject, Barbie. Well done.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > You say that Donald Trump is a pussy grabbing idiot, who shouldn't run this country, yet you want him to take over your healthcare. Egad man, at least fucking man up that you really do want the Don because deep down you want him to grab your pussy... ROTFLMAO.... Joe you are so funny...
> ...


Are you mad?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

dblack said:


> They don't seem to get that. They're all freaking out because Trump is taking away healthcare from people, and I'm like: "Saw that coming."
> 
> I think the main conceit of the statists is that they think government will always represent their interests. But unlike the market, democratic government only represents the _majority _of the people. In their utopia of unlimited democracy, if you aren't in the majority, you're fucked.



Okay, buddy, let's get real.  Most government services happen and continue to happen regardless of who is in power.  

You see, I have no problem if I don't get my way if I'm not in the majority. Usually, events prove me right and I get to say, "I told you so!"  

In this case, Trump is trying to sabotage health care because he couldn't get his way on a repeal.  My guess is the insurance companies are going to put a stop to that nonsense, pretty quickly, but if they don't, then it will probably hasten the day when we get single payer, and that works for me, too.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > You say that Donald Trump is a pussy grabbing idiot, who shouldn't run this country, yet you want him to take over your healthcare. Egad man, at least fucking man up that you really do want the Don because deep down you want him to grab your pussy... ROTFLMAO.... Joe you are so funny...
> ...





> whatever impeachable *offensese*





> Wow, Barbie(Joe), is your English comprehension that poor?


 Joe?  Hmmmmm?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Are you mad?



Naw, Barbie, just bored with you.  You remind me of a childhood acquaintance who listens to hate radio all day and thinks he has original ideas.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > They don't seem to get that. They're all freaking out because Trump is taking away healthcare from people, and I'm like: "Saw that coming."
> ...





> events prove me right


 Bwaaaaaahhhhaaaaahhhhhaaaaaaaaaa... Stop Joe, my sides are hurting...


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...



Um, Barbie, it's spelled right in my original post, and I didn't even have to go back and fix it. (I usually get a red squiggly when I misspell something.) 

So you are getting desperate.


----------



## dblack (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> You see, I have no problem if I don't get my way if I'm not in the majority. Usually, events prove me right and I get to say, "I told you so!"



Prove you "right"? We're talking about values and preferences. There's no one "right" way to do health care. That's why government has no business forcing one solution on everyone. I know it contradicts your core beliefs, but freedom is a good thing Joe. It makes it possible for us to live more fulfilling lives as individuals and allows diversity in society, diversity that makes us stronger and better as a nation.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


Now, Joe, you are as slimy as Bill Clinton.  I copied and pasted what you wrote, then enhanced the word, but it seems that you who were caught had to go back and fix your mistake.  You precious little cupcake you.

I feel sorry for your parents, for I bet they brought you up to be honest and have integrity.  Today they must be very disappointed that
a. You want to make this country a communist country.
b. That you have no honor or integrity.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Now, Joe, you are as slimy as Bill Clinton. I copied and pasted what you wrote, then enhanced the word, but it seems that you who were caught had to go back and fix your mistake. You precious little cupcake you.



um, no, actually I didn't.  I think you inserted a mistake because you were losing an argument... but frankly, that's what I've come to expect from you, Barbie. 



andaronjim said:


> I feel sorry for your parents, for I bet they brought you up to be honest and have integrity. Today they must be very disappointed that
> a. You want to make this country a communist country.
> b. That you have no honor or integrity.



Guy, you can scream Communism all day, but I would love to go back to the country my parents had. The one where Dad could get a good union job and the rich paid their fair share and 'commies" like Eisenhower thought this was a good thing.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

dblack said:


> Prove you "right"? We're talking about values and preferences. There's no one "right" way to do health care. That's why government has no business forcing one solution on everyone. I know it contradicts your core beliefs, but freedom is a good thing Joe. It makes it possible for us to live more fulfilling lives as individuals and allows diversity in society, diversity that makes us stronger and better as a nation.



Guy, I don't feel particularly "free" if I have to stay at a job I hate because I am afraid of losing health care.  I feel less free if after working at that job I really didn't like that much for a number of years, and that day comes when I have to make a medical claim for a procedure my doctor says I need, and I get the run-around from Cigna and have to fight them for years over it. 

The problem with you Libertarians is that your definition of "Freedom" is those with wealth to be able to push around those of us without wealth. 

My definition of freedom is a fair and equal playing field.  

Now, as far as a "right" way, you are right, there is no "Right" way. 

There are "better ways"... And when the countries that have single payer all live longer, have lower infant mortality rates, and spend less per capita than we do, then they are doing it "better".


----------



## dblack (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Prove you "right"? We're talking about values and preferences. There's no one "right" way to do health care. That's why government has no business forcing one solution on everyone. I know it contradicts your core beliefs, but freedom is a good thing Joe. It makes it possible for us to live more fulfilling lives as individuals and allows diversity in society, diversity that makes us stronger and better as a nation.
> ...



Sorry Joe. I know you don't get freedom. But you do, at least, seem to understand that it isn't compatible with socialism. As a nation, we're going to have to choose.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

dblack said:


> Sorry Joe. I know you don't get freedom. But you do, at least, seem to understand that it isn't compatible with socialism. As a nation, we're going to have to choose.



Neither Socialism or Capitalism are compatible with "Freedom".  One just puts the power with the majority, the other with the wealthy.  Again, I know this is tough for you, because the Koch Brothers spend billions brainwashing you into thinking greed and freedom are the same thing. 

The thing is, whether you are getting your health care from a government agency or a private company, it's still all "Socialist". 

You are either paying in more than you are getting out, or you are getting out more than you are paying in.  

The problem with the current system is that it allows those with money and power to abuse you. Want to quit? Better not, or we'll call your cancer a "Pre-existing" condition and good luck getting new insurance. 

That's not freedom, that's rich people having you by the short hairs. 

On the other hand, if you had single payer, and your coverage was not dependent on your employment or finance status. You're sick, you go in and see a doctor and get treatment. 

Yes, it might suck for the doctors who went into medicine for six figure salaries, I guess, if the government limits what they get paid, but they are already being limited by the insurance companies where the "Family practice" is being replaced by the corporate chain medicine anyway, and the doctor is just an employee.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ " The thing is, you never buy a product because Daddy Warbucks is the CEO." What happened to Apple stock when they fired Steve Jobs? What happened to the stock when they hired him back?
> ...


/----/ You idiot. The stock went up because of the way Jobs developed products starting with the iPod.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > No, if people like Joe like the game of Soccer, that is just fine, because Joe wants America to be more like Europe. Why else does he want the Evil Republicans and Donald Trump to be in charge of HIS healthcare..
> ...


/----/ You clowns have been predicting that since 2009.  But it helps you sleep at night:
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/republicans_a_regional_party/


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ " The thing is, you never buy a product because Daddy Warbucks is the CEO." What happened to Apple stock when they fired Steve Jobs? What happened to the stock when they hired him back?
> ...


/----/ Here's another one where folks buy the Daddy Warbucks CEO: Sears Sinks After Key Investor Berkowitz Plans to Leave Board


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Now, Joe, you are as slimy as Bill Clinton. I copied and pasted what you wrote, then enhanced the word, but it seems that you who were caught had to go back and fix your mistake. You precious little cupcake you.
> ...


Those same Union Jobs that caused Eastern Airlines to go bankrupt?  The same ones that caused GM to go bankrupt?  Joe because the unions told people to strike when the company was in trouble, that was the change that came to America that made people expendable.  Stupid fucks like you, just want to continue the status quo of FAILURE...


----------



## dblack (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> The thing is, whether you are getting your health care from a government agency or a private company, it's still all "Socialist".



No. Private companies are the opposite of Socialism.

Listen, Joe. You can't just go around making up your own words. Or, well, I guess you can, but then you're not actually communicating with anyone. You might as well be typing gibberish.



> Yes, it might suck for the doctors who went into medicine for six figure salaries, I guess, if the government limits what they get paid, but they are already being limited by the insurance companies where the "Family practice" is being replaced by the corporate chain medicine anyway, and the doctor is just an employee.



It sucks for anyone who wants something different than what the government (and its lobbyists) think they ought to have.


----------



## Slyhunter (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Joe why do you want the insurance companies to get that corporate welfare? I could of sworn a while ago, you wanted all corporate welfare to stop? Should evil rich companies be subsidized by the government or not?
> ...


We can't afford to give paid medical care to every citizen in America. It could bankrupt our country. And we definitely can't afford to do it if we keep allowing third worlders to come into this country and sap our resources.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

Slyhunter said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


 It is all about Joe and wanting the country to be Communist.  Problem for Joe is, he would lose his 2 houses that he owns....Right Joe?


> *Cloward–Piven strategy*
> The *Cloward–Piven* *strategy* is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists *and* political activists Richard *Cloward* and Frances Fox *Piven* that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".
> *Cloward–Piven strategy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia*
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward–Piven_strategy


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ You idiot. The stock went up because of the way Jobs developed products starting with the iPod.



Jobs "developed" them, or other people developed them, and had their work declared "intellectual property"?  

See the problem, buddy?  



andaronjim said:


> Those same Union Jobs that caused Eastern Airlines to go bankrupt? The same ones that caused GM to go bankrupt?



Actually, those companies went bankrupt because the guys making the 8 figure salaries made bad decisions.  Not because the unions demanded good wages and benefits. 

Sorry you are confused on this point. 



andaronjim said:


> Joe because the unions told people to strike when the company was in trouble, that was the change that came to America that made people expendable. Stupid fucks like you, just want to continue the status quo of FAILURE...



so what's your alternative, we all work for slave wages and no benefits, so a few rich people can be richer?  Because somehow you have delusions of having your Barbie Mansion?  



dblack said:


> No. Private companies are the opposite of Socialism.
> 
> Listen, Joe. You can't just go around making up your own words. Or, well, I guess you can, but then you're not actually communicating with anyone. You might as well be typing gibberish.



You are avoiding the point. If I pay into an insurance plan or work to pay for insurance, and I don't get sick that year, I'm paying for the guy who did get sick that year.  

That's socialism, buddy. Or at the least collectivism.  



Slyhunter said:


> We can't afford to give paid medical care to every citizen in America. It could bankrupt our country. And we definitely can't afford to do it if we keep allowing third worlders to come into this country and sap our resources.



Two issues here.  

Of course we can give paid medical care to everyone in the country. We already spend more per capita than any country in the world, and those countries provide health care to all citizens.  The money is there, just not being spent properly.  Less for CEO salaries and more for primary care.  Problem solved.  

As for the "Third Worlders", they probably produce more than they 'sap".  Again, the problem is wealth distribution, not who is coming here.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ You idiot. The stock went up because of the way Jobs developed products starting with the iPod.
> ...





> so what's your alternative, we all work for slave wages and no benefits,


 Poor liberal victims who aren't educated enough end up doing this all the time.  I did straight out of high school, but got skills and knowledge, left the victimhood of liberalism and now work for myself.  Joe, stupid fucks like you will never leave the liberal victimhood.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ You idiot. The stock went up because of the way Jobs developed products starting with the iPod.
> ...





> As for the "Third Worlders", they probably produce more than they 'sap". Again, the problem is wealth distribution, not who is coming here.


So 30 million illegal people who show up at the emergency room and don't speak English get FREE stuff but then those hospitals have to charge US and our insurance the costs for that FREE stuff, but you say it is the CEO's that are at fault?  Just cant get more stupid than a fucking or non fucking liberal..


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 17, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


Just lower the costs you rwnj.  You're in charge.  And remember what Trump said before he was POTUS?

*Donald J. Trump*‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump
Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible.

11:01 AM - 8 Nov 2013


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 17, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



How much is healthcare costing California now?  Probably $400 billion annually or more.  

And rich people in Canada of course come to the USA to get quicker/better treatment.  But what do poor Canadians do?  What do poor Americans do?  Where do they go?  

Canadians and Brits love their socialized medicine.  Sorry to be the barer of bad news.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Poor liberal victims who aren't educated enough end up doing this all the time. I did straight out of high school, but got skills and knowledge, left the victimhood of liberalism and now work for myself. Joe, stupid fucks like you will never leave the liberal victimhood.



Yes, I know, you just bought your Barbie Dreamhouse.  

So that's your answer, being a big man on the internets? 

The point is, we graduate thousands of new kids out of the colleges who can't get jobs, and it's only going to get worse.  

Why do you think all these college kids supported Commie Bernie?

What do you think they are going to do when Trump doesn't bring back Daddy's Factory job?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> So 30 million illegal people who show up at the emergency room and don't speak English get FREE stuff but then those hospitals have to charge US and our insurance the costs for that FREE stuff, but you say it is the CEO's that are at fault? Just cant get more stupid than a fucking or non fucking liberal..



The CEO's could push for single payer, and that would solve the problem. They consider their 8 figure salaries more important. 

You could set up free clinics in poor neighborhoods for a fraction of what Emergency Room treatments cost.  

Again- the Europeans have figured this out.  

(This is where you sputter you don't care about what they do in Europe)


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Poor liberal victims who aren't educated enough end up doing this all the time. I did straight out of high school, but got skills and knowledge, left the victimhood of liberalism and now work for myself. Joe, stupid fucks like you will never leave the liberal victimhood.
> ...





> we graduate thousands of new kids out of the colleges who can't get jobs,


 So President Trump didn't inherit a roaring economic recovery from Obama?
If these  "kids" did graduate, why cant they with college education do more than me ,  a high school graduate who developed a skill set that took me to my own business?  Are you telling US that college is a waste of time?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > So 30 million illegal people who show up at the emergency room and don't speak English get FREE stuff but then those hospitals have to charge US and our insurance the costs for that FREE stuff, but you say it is the CEO's that are at fault? Just cant get more stupid than a fucking or non fucking liberal..
> ...





> You could set up free clinics in poor neighborhoods for a fraction of what Emergency Room treatments cost.


 And there are those clinics Joe, but it isn't that those poor people can get FREE healthcare, it is because the white middle class get better care, so must be punished like the poor.  That is what liberalism is all about, everyone equally poor and equally miserable, that is called FAIRNESS...


----------



## dblack (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > "_*The thing is, whether you are getting your health care from a government agency or a private company, it's still all "Socialist"*_."
> ...



I'm not avoiding your point, I'm saying it's dead wrong. Socialism is _government_ mandated collectivism. Voluntary collectivism is a fine thing. Society depends on it. If someone wants to start a commune (or a health care collective, or whatever, or a charity) that's great! It's when they try to force people to join them that I have a problem with it.


----------



## debbiedowner (Oct 17, 2017)

Trump signals support for ObamaCare deal


----------



## dblack (Oct 17, 2017)

debbiedowner said:


> Trump signals support for ObamaCare deal



I gave up trying to predict what Trump will do. But Congress will never let go of health care.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 17, 2017)

dblack said:


> debbiedowner said:
> 
> 
> > Trump signals support for ObamaCare deal
> ...


/—-/ Pres Trump will slice and dice it. Death by a thousand cuts.


----------



## miketx (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > lets go from a horrible idea to a worse one.
> ...


Move there. Don't the door hit you.


----------



## dblack (Oct 17, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > debbiedowner said:
> ...


I hope so. But all I've seen him do so far is make an ass of himself and embarrass the nation.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> So President Trump didn't inherit a roaring economic recovery from Obama?
> If these "kids" did graduate, why cant they with college education do more than me , a high school graduate who developed a skill set that took me to my own business? Are you telling US that college is a waste of time?



well, I guess they could just make shit up like you do.  

That will work.  

But the job market out there still kind of sucks, really.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> And there are those clinics Joe, but it isn't that those poor people can get FREE healthcare, it is because the white middle class get better care, so must be punished like the poor. That is what liberalism is all about, everyone equally poor and equally miserable, that is called FAIRNESS...



I'm not sure why ANYONE should get better care because of their wealth. That's just wrong.  

But, oh, yeah, your boy Trump blinked today. Big Insurance will keep getting their corporate welfare for two more years. 

Told you so!


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

dblack said:


> I'm not avoiding your point, I'm saying it's dead wrong. Socialism is _government_ mandated collectivism. Voluntary collectivism is a fine thing.



I didn't volunteer for big insurance collectivism.  I just kind of got stuck with it because that's the awful system we evolved in this country that everyone admits is broken. 



Cellblock2429 said:


> /—-/ Pres Trump will slice and dice it. Death by a thousand cuts.



Yeah, um, today, a bipartisan group just agreed to do what they refused to do under Obama, pay big insurance to keep subsidizing the poor. 

So once again, you guys surrendered on the point.


----------



## dblack (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not avoiding your point, I'm saying it's dead wrong. Socialism is _government_ mandated collectivism. Voluntary collectivism is a fine thing.
> ...



Before ACA, your participation in any given health insurance plan was strictly voluntary. Just say no.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 17, 2017)

dblack said:


> Before ACA, your participation in any given health insurance plan was strictly voluntary. Just say no.



So how about this.  Let's just create a public option.  You can pick that or your employer program. 

Employers would never go for it, because they like lording this shit over their wage slaves.


----------



## dblack (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Before ACA, your participation in any given health insurance plan was strictly voluntary. Just say no.
> ...


That would be a vast improvement over ACA. If I were in Congress, I'd vote for it as a replacement.


> You can pick that or your employer program.


 ...or, better still, you can pick any damned thing you like! We don't need government telling us what we can "pick".



> Employers would never go for it, because they like lording this shit over their wage slaves.



Is this me, agreeing with you twice in the same post?!?


----------



## Darkwind (Oct 17, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hey, I'd be happy to go to Single Payer, and just be done with it.
> ...



won't you think of the children?!?!


----------



## Slyhunter (Oct 17, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> You are avoiding the point. If I pay into an insurance plan or work to pay for insurance, and I don't get sick that year, I'm paying for the guy who did get sick that year.
> 
> That's socialism, buddy. Or at the least collectivism.


So people going to the arcade and loosing are paying the ones who win so gambling is collectivism or socialism?



JoeB131 said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > We can't afford to give paid medical care to every citizen in America. It could bankrupt our country. And we definitely can't afford to do it if we keep allowing third worlders to come into this country and sap our resources.
> ...


The countries who pay health care for their citizens don't pay their fare share in protecting themselves militarily. They are using Americans Armies to implicitly guard them. If we reduced our military forces maybe then we could do the healthcare bit, for citizens only, but then Russia and China would invade anyone they damn well feel like it and NK would take over SK and Iraq would shove Israel into the Ocean, and Puerto Rico would be a desolated wasteland.

Third worlders do not pay more than they use in Welfare, schools, healthcare, food stamps, etc. especially when you count their anchor babies hand outs.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 18, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > And there are those clinics Joe, but it isn't that those poor people can get FREE healthcare, it is because the white middle class get better care, so must be punished like the poor. That is what liberalism is all about, everyone equally poor and equally miserable, that is called FAIRNESS...
> ...


So right now if nothing is done with Obummercare, no one will have insurance and guess what Joe, the liberals will have won again, because when everyone is equally poor and equally miserable, then the liberals have done their job about FAIRNESS.. You will lose your 2 houses Joe if this country ever goes Socialist.  Just look at Cuba you dolt and see who owns stuff there.  Dumbass..


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 18, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not avoiding your point, I'm saying it's dead wrong. Socialism is _government_ mandated collectivism. Voluntary collectivism is a fine thing.
> ...


/----/ You've been wrong about Pres Trump since day one. Today is no different.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 18, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


Are they providing a public good or public service?


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 18, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Joe why do you want the insurance companies to get that corporate welfare? I could of sworn a while ago, you wanted all corporate welfare to stop? Should evil rich companies be subsidized by the government or not?
> ...


Let's convince the right wing to end the drug war to pay for health care.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 18, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...


buy it from an LLC, instead!


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 18, 2017)

dblack said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > You see, I have no problem if I don't get my way if I'm not in the majority. Usually, events prove me right and I get to say, "I told you so!"
> ...


The goal is to cover the most people.  How many solutions are there for that?

Actually choosing actual health care, is between the patient and the doctor.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 18, 2017)

dblack said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...


Socialism is what we have to optimize.  We have a mixed-market economy.  There is no such thing as free market capitalism in the developed world.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 18, 2017)

dblack said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > The thing is, whether you are getting your health care from a government agency or a private company, it's still all "Socialist".
> ...


Not really.  Corporate welfare is alive and well.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 18, 2017)

dblack said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...


Yes, well regulated militia are a collective that is necessary to the security of a free State.

When it really matters, it is socialism that we rely on, not capitalism.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 18, 2017)

Slyhunter said:


> The countries who pay health care for their citizens don't pay their fare share in protecting themselves militarily. They are using Americans Armies to implicitly guard them. If we reduced our military forces maybe then we could do the healthcare bit, for citizens only, but then Russia and China would invade anyone they damn well feel like it and NK would take over SK and Iraq would shove Israel into the Ocean, and Puerto Rico would be a desolated wasteland.



Yes, sputtering your hatred for the rest of the world is fun and all, but the fact is, we spend more money on defense than the next 10 countries combined, and 8 of them are allies. 

Pretending broken down third world countries like Iran or North Korea are real threats is just laughable. 

again, we are ALREADY spending enough money to provide universal health care. We spend 17% of GDP on health care compared to other countries that spend bout 10%. The problem is that since our system is about greed, most of that money goes to paying for Mansions instead of Hospitals, and that's the real tragedy of this.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 18, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ You've been wrong about Pres Trump since day one. Today is no different.



Buddy, Trump blinked.  He agreed to do what for that last four years the GOP claimed was illegal- spending government money to prop up big insurance. 



andaronjim said:


> So right now if nothing is done with Obummercare, no one will have insurance and guess what Joe, the liberals will have won again, because when everyone is equally poor and equally miserable, then the liberals have done their job about FAIRNESS.. You will lose your 2 houses Joe if this country ever goes Socialist. Just look at Cuba you dolt and see who owns stuff there. Dumbass..



Actually, if you boy Trump hadn't blinked, a bunch of the dumb white trash in Jesusland would have figured out that the "Affordable Care Act" they've been getting insurance through for the first time in their miserable lives is the same thing as "ObamaCare".


----------



## sakinago (Oct 18, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Hey, I'd be happy to go to Single Payer, and just be done with it.
> 
> But you guys insisted that we not leave the Insurance Companies behind.
> 
> ...



Who insisted? Since when was there a discussion with Obamacare? The couple thousand page bill was made behind close doors, then rushed for a vote before anyone had time to read it. There was no discussion. And no one gives a rats ass about the insurance companies. There's no "let's keep the insurance companies around for their sake." That's ridiculous. Those against the ACA  have been wanting for decades to free up the healthcare market, and instead there's been regulation after regulation passed. And then the ACA is presented, like it was 100% necessary or all the poor would die, without anyone hearing us out. 

It's not like free market healthcare systems do not work, like the left looooves to claim. We haven't had a free system in a very long time, it's been heavily regulated for decades upon decades. The Swiss have a very free and competitive privatized market, that not only provides very high quality AND TIMELY care, it's also quite affordable. And there's no massive tax burden on the people for that, and there are thousands and thousands of specialized plans to choose from that fit you...and their healthcare system doesn't require 60% of the population working in healthcare to work through the highly inefficient and time consuming bureaucracy. There's also no rationing of care as we see in single payer systems, E.G. "You don't need a new knee, here's a cane and pain pills instead." "And when you eventually need a new knee, you'll have to wait around at least 6 weeks."


----------



## dblack (Oct 18, 2017)

sakinago said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hey, I'd be happy to go to Single Payer, and just be done with it.
> ...



The funny thing is, they're all convince single payer will send the insurance companies packing. Not if it's based on Medicare. Medicare doesn't remove insurance companies profits from the mix, it removes consumer choice. Government buys the insurance for us, from the same rogue's gallery of vested interests, with precious little input from individuals.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 18, 2017)

sakinago said:


> Who insisted? Since when was there a discussion with Obamacare? The couple thousand page bill was made behind close doors, then rushed for a vote before anyone had time to read it. There was no discussion. And no one gives a rats ass about the insurance companies. There's no "let's keep the insurance companies around for their sake." That's ridiculous. Those against the ACA have been wanting for decades to free up the healthcare market, and instead there's been regulation after regulation passed. And then the ACA is presented, like it was 100% necessary or all the poor would die, without anyone hearing us out.



Yeah, the problem with "Freeing up the insuarnce market" usually means, 'Let's let the Insurance industry take people's money, and then screw them if they get anything more serious than a cold."  

Look, buddy, the left wanted a public option. Instead, they went along with what was essentially national Romney-Care.  And the GOP was all for RomneyCare, until the Black Guy Did It.  

Check out the 2008 election. Nobody gave Romney any shit about RomneyCare.  He got more shit for being a Mormon.  By 2012, the Evangelicals didn't care about Mormonism anymore and Romney wouldn't be caught having a drink with his own program. 



sakinago said:


> It's not like free market healthcare systems do not work, like the left looooves to claim.



Hey, buddy, you try to fight with an insurance company some time to get a treatment that your doctor says you need to have, and they don't want to pay for.  Then tell me how the "Free Market" works.  



sakinago said:


> The Swiss have a very free and competitive privatized market, that not only provides very high quality AND TIMELY care, it's also quite affordable.



The entire Swiss economy is based on moving other people's money around... and they have universal health care.


----------



## bendog (Oct 18, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > As I said before, liberals have a deathwish, not only upon the rest of US but themselves because liberals have no clue how to be happy. That is why they seek ways to self suicide....
> ...


I'm not a fan of single payer, but the irony that Aaron's OP and the Oranguton's misgivings about insurance companies SUPPORT changing Obamacare to singlepayer.  LOL  Of course the Oranguton was for single payer before he was against it.  So, he perhaps is consistent.


----------



## bendog (Oct 18, 2017)

dblack said:


> sakinago said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


I don't think many oldsters are complaining.  Medicare has problems, but consumer "choice" is not one of them.


----------



## sakinago (Oct 20, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> sakinago said:
> 
> 
> > Who insisted? Since when was there a discussion with Obamacare? The couple thousand page bill was made behind close doors, then rushed for a vote before anyone had time to read it. There was no discussion. And no one gives a rats ass about the insurance companies. There's no "let's keep the insurance companies around for their sake." That's ridiculous. Those against the ACA have been wanting for decades to free up the healthcare market, and instead there's been regulation after regulation passed. And then the ACA is presented, like it was 100% necessary or all the poor would die, without anyone hearing us out.
> ...





JoeB131 said:


> sakinago said:
> 
> 
> > Who insisted? Since when was there a discussion with Obamacare? The couple thousand page bill was made behind close doors, then rushed for a vote before anyone had time to read it. There was no discussion. And no one gives a rats ass about the insurance companies. There's no "let's keep the insurance companies around for their sake." That's ridiculous. Those against the ACA have been wanting for decades to free up the healthcare market, and instead there's been regulation after regulation passed. And then the ACA is presented, like it was 100% necessary or all the poor would die, without anyone hearing us out.
> ...


What does what YOU think about Swiss economy (surprise, only a small portion of them are bankers and financiers) have anything to do with the conversation?  And there’s a big difference between universal healthcare and single payer. Yes it’s universal (like if you own and drive a car in the US, you need car insurance), but it’s a much freer, affordable, customizable, and competitive market...that works extremely well for them. Longer life expectancy, very happy and healthy people, that aren’t looking at a social system that’s on the verge of collapsing.

And not many liked Romney, nor his Romney care Mass. policy. Many on the right position was that more regulation is bad, making the ACA VERY BAD. And the left KNEW that they’d never get enough votes to go to single payer despite have a majority in house and senate (as admitted by the author of ACA)...which is why they went with the ACA, as a stepping stone that was never meant to be sustainable. In hopes of coming in with single payer later.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 20, 2017)

sakinago said:


> What does what YOU think about Swiss economy (surprise, only a small portion of them are bankers and financiers) have anything to do with the conversation? And there’s a big difference between universal healthcare and single payer. Yes it’s universal (like if you own and drive a car in the US, you need car insurance), but it’s a much freer, affordable, customizable, and competitive market...that works extremely well for them. Longer life expectancy, very happy and healthy people, that aren’t looking at a social system that’s on the verge of collapsing.



Well, yeah, when you are taking a skim from handling the rest of the world's money and dividing it among a mere 8 million people, you can pretty much run a good system. 

Healthcare in Switzerland - Wikipedia

*Healthcare in Switzerland* is universal[3] and is regulated by the _Swiss Federal Law on Health Insurance_. There are no free state-provided health services, but private health insurance is compulsory for all persons residing in Switzerland (within three months of taking up residence or being born in the country)

Wow. That actually SOUNDS like ObamaCare!


----------



## sakinago (Oct 20, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> sakinago said:
> 
> 
> > What does what YOU think about Swiss economy (surprise, only a small portion of them are bankers and financiers) have anything to do with the conversation? And there’s a big difference between universal healthcare and single payer. Yes it’s universal (like if you own and drive a car in the US, you need car insurance), but it’s a much freer, affordable, customizable, and competitive market...that works extremely well for them. Longer life expectancy, very happy and healthy people, that aren’t looking at a social system that’s on the verge of collapsing.
> ...


Not at all, sure there are some regulations...no where near as much as our system pre-ACA, and especially post ACA. I’m pretty sure the wiki you’re citing even states that they have a much freer system than our own. And no they don’t divy up the money...since they aren’t a socialist country. And why do business all around the world use banking from their home country? Your making it sound like the Swiss are just cherry picking off the entire world, when if someone does use Swiss banking...it’s because they barely skim at all, in a very free market, in a neutral country.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 20, 2017)

sakinago said:


> Not at all, sure there are some regulations...no where near as much as our system pre-ACA, and especially post ACA. I’m pretty sure the wiki you’re citing even states that they have a much freer system than our own. And no they don’t divy up the money...since they aren’t a socialist country. And why do business all around the world use banking from their home country? Your making it sound like the Swiss are just cherry picking off the entire world, when if someone does use Swiss banking...it’s because they barely skim at all, in a very free market, in a neutral country.



Actually, what Switzerland does is take money for doing the banking for very sleazy people.... 

You know, like when they processed the gold teeth stolen from Holocaust victims in WWII.  

The thing is, Switzerland is a small country with only 8 million people. Of course, they can have a simpler system than we have.


----------



## sakinago (Oct 20, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> sakinago said:
> 
> 
> > Not at all, sure there are some regulations...no where near as much as our system pre-ACA, and especially post ACA. I’m pretty sure the wiki you’re citing even states that they have a much freer system than our own. And no they don’t divy up the money...since they aren’t a socialist country. And why do business all around the world use banking from their home country? Your making it sound like the Swiss are just cherry picking off the entire world, when if someone does use Swiss banking...it’s because they barely skim at all, in a very free market, in a neutral country.
> ...


...and what does the size of a country have to do with a free market system not working?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 20, 2017)

sakinago said:


> ...and what does the size of a country have to do with a free market system not working?



A small country where nearly everyone is affluent?  You're kidding, right?


----------



## Slyhunter (Oct 20, 2017)

sakinago said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > sakinago said:
> ...


They're not paying for the R&D of their drugs we, Americans, are.


----------



## sakinago (Oct 20, 2017)

Slyhunter said:


> sakinago said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


They have a private system...they are. Granted we pay for a lot more R and D, which is very expensive, and it needs to be remembered that  no ones going to spend millions of dollars to make a drug they aren’t going make money off of.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 21, 2017)

sakinago said:


> They have a private system...they are. Granted we pay for a lot more R and D, which is very expensive, and it needs to be remembered that no ones going to spend millions of dollars to make a drug they aren’t going make money off of.



Yes, they spend a lot of money on pills for middle class ailments like erectile dysfunction and depression, but not so much on treating real diseases...


----------



## sakinago (Oct 21, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> sakinago said:
> 
> 
> > They have a private system...they are. Granted we pay for a lot more R and D, which is very expensive, and it needs to be remembered that no ones going to spend millions of dollars to make a drug they aren’t going make money off of.
> ...


Someone’s got blinders on.


----------



## dblack (Oct 21, 2017)

Care4all said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> ...




What Trump has done (and let's be clear, this is all Rand Paul whispering in his ear, Trump doesn't have a clue what he's doing) is to stick a fork in the quid-pro-quo cooked up by Congress and the insurance lobby. If we want to help poor people with government money we should give it to them directly and avoid funneling it through corporate interests for "processing".


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 21, 2017)

sakinago said:


> Someone’s got blinders on.



naw, man, I think when someone looks at another human being suffering in pain and he thinks, "how can I make money off of that!" there is something wrong with that person.


----------



## Care4all (Oct 21, 2017)

dblack said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


It seems like that would be the right way to go, 

but how could they make that work?

these people can not buy the insurance and then be reimbursed, because they do not have the money to buy it upfront...even if being reimbursed...

if the gvt gives them the money before they buy the insurance, what's to make certain they buy the insurance with it?  You would think they would but.....  

the insurance companies, in the law, are required to offer these cost sharing reduction plans for those who make only 250% of poverty and below....and I just read somewhere that 50% of the people eligible for the premium subsidy assistance, are also eligible for these CSR plans that also help bring deductibles down from $5000 in the normal plan, to say $800 with the cost sharing reduction plan, and emergency room fees from like $500 down to $250 and doctor's visits for like $10 instead of $35 a visit and all kinds of stuff like that.....from what I understand?

And with that requirement for the Insurance companies to offer to the poorest on the exchange these lower deductible and cost plans, it would make all of the other people, 50% receiving premium subsidies on the exchange, pay more for their policy premiums to cover the cost sharing reductions for the poorest 50% on health care subsidies....

BUT that would not come out of their own pockets......because subsidies are based on a percentage of the citizen's income that they can afford to pay in premiums (something like 9% or 10% of their income?), and the govt picks up the rest of the bill.....  so if they had to pay $150 a month, when premiums were $300 a month, the gvt would pick up the other $150,

BUTTTTTTTTTT, if the premiums went up to $400 a month, these people would still only owe the $150 for their premiums each month, and the govt would have to pick up the other $250 a month to bring it to the new, $400 a month price.

So basically, the government is not saving a dime, by reneging on the extra cost sharing reduction subsidies to the insurance companies to help pay for the CSR plans they are required to offer, becaquse now all people on the exchange will have to have higher premiums to cover the cost to the insurance companies for the CSR plans....

it saves the govt nothing, and makes no sense, especially with the way the program is set up....imo.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 21, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ "Your misogyny " Becuase I don't like Hildabeast's politics and ethics. That doesn't make me a misognyst. I support the following women 100%:
> ...


/——/ So any woman who doesn’t tow the FemiNazi agenda “knows her place.” I thought the whole feminist movement was meant to empower women to express their own beliefs. BTW I have no desire or need to impress the likes of you.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 21, 2017)

dblack said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


I don't want to give poor people any more money... They have taken 22 trillion dollars and did nothing but stay poor.  Before FDR put a chicken in everyone's pot, people had to work, or find charity to survive. Now we see 1 party taking from those that work, and giving it to those that don't work, thus keeping those who don't work, not working.  Give them an incentive, by giving them nothing, but the education from public schools and see how well they survive... Public education is supposed to be all great, right liberals....


----------



## dblack (Oct 21, 2017)

Care4all said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > What Trump has done (and let's be clear, this is all Rand Paul whispering in his ear, Trump doesn't have a clue what he's doing) is to stick a fork in the quid-pro-quo cooked up by Congress and the insurance lobby. If we want to help poor people with government money we should give it to them directly and avoid funneling it through corporate interests for "processing".
> ...



... they might figure out a better way to pay for their health care than insurance. I have no interest in telling them what they can do with the money. I'd only support such a program with no strings attached.


----------



## Care4all (Oct 21, 2017)

dblack said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...


i'm just saying, the way it is set up, the insurance company is going to get their money, one way or the other so Rand Paul whispering to Trump to do this is just a guise....  the gvt saves nothing and other people, citizens who do not get the premium subsidies on the exchange, get hurt.....


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 21, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> I don't want to give poor people any more money... They have taken 22 trillion dollars and did nothing but stay poor. Before FDR put a chicken in everyone's pot, people had to work, or find charity to survive.



A chicken in every pot was a Republican expression.  It was used by Herbert Hoover's supporters.  

Chicken in Every Pot - Dictionary definition of Chicken in Every Pot | Encyclopedia.com: FREE online dictionary



andaronjim said:


> Now we see 1 party taking from those that work, and giving it to those that don't work, thus keeping those who don't work, not working.



Again, who is taking from whom again?  As I've pointed out to you, most folks on Food stamps work.  The rest are children and the elderly.  Meanwhile, the One Percent who have 43% of the wealth don't do 43% of the work.  Nowhere near.  



andaronjim said:


> Give them an incentive, by giving them nothing, but the education from public schools and see how well they survive... Public education is supposed to be all great, right liberals....



No problem.  Just make sure the rich kids have to go to the same crappy schools the poor kids have to go to.  Just to make it fair.  Then have a huge estate tax so we aren't passing down wealth like medieval barons.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 22, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /—-/ So they all lied. Sure they did. Sure they did. You’ll defend the predator and his enabler until your dying breath.
> ...


/—-/ The only time Dems worry about wasting money is when it’s used to expose DemocRATS dirty deeds.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Oct 23, 2017)

*Mod Note:


11 posts deleted.

this thread is about insurance, not Trump, not the Clintons.

Get back on topic*


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 23, 2017)

WillHaftawaite said:


> *Mod Note:
> 
> 
> 11 posts deleted.
> ...


/----/ How can we discuss health insurance without mentioning the politicians making all of the decisions?


----------



## Hugo Furst (Oct 23, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > *Mod Note:
> ...



*The posts I deleted had NOTHING to do with the subject.*


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 23, 2017)

Why have Republicans been so dead set against the ACA? Why 1%er insurance companies fought against the ACA? 

Remember that ACA required that 80% of your premium go to patient care.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 23, 2017)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Why have Republicans been so dead set against the ACA? Why 1%er insurance companies fought against the ACA?
> 
> Remember that ACA required that 80% of your premium go to patient care.


/----/ Asked and answered uncountable times since 2010.


----------



## DGS49 (Oct 23, 2017)

Among other things, the unconstitutional un-Affordable Care Act, took "insurance" and turned it into a government social program, knowing that "insurance" companies would be bankrupted in the transition.  It was INTENDED TO FAIL, so that people would get pissed off and demand some variation of Socialized Medicine.

How would you feel if the Government told GM, Ford and FCA that they were no longer allowed to sell pickup trucks to anyone but farmers and small business people who actually needed the utility of a truck?  Then they passed a law that said the Government would reimburse the companies for the billions in lost revenue and profits?

That is exactly what ACA did.  It forced insurance companies to cover costs that have nothing to do with "insurance," then agreed to pay the insurers for the losses that the mandates made inevitable.  Not only unconstitutional but stupid and/or dishonest.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 23, 2017)

DGS49 said:


> Among other things, the unconstitutional un-Affordable Care Act, took "insurance" and turned it into a government social program, knowing that "insurance" companies would be bankrupted in the transition. It was INTENDED TO FAIL, so that people would get pissed off and demand some variation of Socialized Medicine.
> 
> How would you feel if the Government told GM, Ford and FCA that they were no longer allowed to sell pickup trucks to anyone but farmers and small business people who actually needed the utility of a truck? Then they passed a law that said the Government would reimburse the companies for the billions in lost revenue and profits?
> 
> That is exactly what ACA did. It forced insurance companies to cover costs that have nothing to do with "insurance," then agreed to pay the insurers for the losses that the mandates made inevitable. Not only unconstitutional but stupid and/or dishonest.



I'm not sure your analogy works.  

The problem was that the insurers weren't covering things they had promised to cover.  They were doing things like calling acne a pre-existing condition for someone who had breast cancer.


----------



## dblack (Oct 23, 2017)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Why have Republicans been so dead set against the ACA? Why 1%er insurance companies fought against the ACA?
> 
> Remember that ACA required that 80% of your premium go to patient care.



100% Organic!


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 24, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > As I said before, liberals have a deathwish, not only upon the rest of US but themselves because liberals have no clue how to be happy. That is why they seek ways to self suicide....
> ...



Do you really believe you have an evenly averaged system you make these claims about ?

There are plenty of situations where results are great for the money spent.  And those are matched with some very inefficent and ineffective systems.

We are talking about a country of 325,000,000 people.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 24, 2017)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Why have Republicans been so dead set against the ACA? Why 1%er insurance companies fought against the ACA?
> 
> Remember that ACA required that 80% of your premium go to patient care.


Why are you liberals so hell bent on giving our tax dollars to evil insurance companies for corporate welfare?  Are you now for the big evil corporations and not the little guys who have to pay taxes for that corporate welfare?  I guess the cat is finally out of the bag, for who really are for the people and their children....


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 24, 2017)

You 





andaronjim said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > Why have Republicans been so dead set against the ACA? Why 1%er insurance companies fought against the ACA?
> ...


/—-/ Liberals are always in the bag for evil greedy corporations


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 24, 2017)

MadChemist said:


> Do you really believe you have an evenly averaged system you make these claims about ?
> 
> There are plenty of situations where results are great for the money spent. And those are matched with some very inefficent and ineffective systems.
> 
> We are talking about a country of 325,000,000 people.



Yes, we are.  Of those, pre-ACA, 47 of them didn't have health insurance. 25 Million had shit insurance

When you don't have health insurance, you don't see a doctor when you have that pain until that pain becomes unbearable. You don't see one during your pregnancy.  

So not surprisingly, a lot of treatable problems don't get treated.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 24, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Why are you liberals so hell bent on giving our tax dollars to evil insurance companies for corporate welfare? Are you now for the big evil corporations and not the little guys who have to pay taxes for that corporate welfare? I guess the cat is finally out of the bag, for who really are for the people and their children....



Barbie, we are all for the rich paying this corporate welfare... but we'd rather have single payer.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 24, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> MadChemist said:
> 
> 
> > Do you really believe you have an evenly averaged system you make these claims about ?
> ...


/----/ Libs idea of shit insurance is a policy that doesn't include mammograms and birth control for 50 year old men. And wealthy people paid their own routine Dr visits and held catastrophic policies for emergencies. Obozo said:  "Dat no be good. Gotta go with shitty insurance."


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 24, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ Libs idea of shit insurance is a policy that doesn't include mammograms and birth control for 50 year old men. And wealthy people paid their own routine Dr visits and held catastrophic policies for emergencies. Obozo said: "Dat no be good. Gotta go with shitty insurance."



Again, when that happy day comes when you have to argue with an insurance company to get treatment you doctor says you need to have, I'm sure you'll have a different opinion about the goodness of insurance companies.


----------



## dblack (Oct 24, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ Libs idea of shit insurance is a policy that doesn't include mammograms and birth control for 50 year old men. And wealthy people paid their own routine Dr visits and held catastrophic policies for emergencies. Obozo said: "Dat no be good. Gotta go with shitty insurance."
> ...



Clearly, the answer is to force people to buy insurance anyway, and have the government make them promise to play nice.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 24, 2017)

dblack said:


> Clearly, the answer is to force people to buy insurance anyway, and have the government make them promise to play nice.



Well, it's a bit more than "making them promise".  MOre like - put in laws saying, This is what you have to cover. 

But the contrary to that is to make everyone buy insurance.  Otherwise, they'd just buy insurance when they got sick. 

You see, Insurance companies have gotten a ride so far because employers and the government handle most of this.  If every last one of us had to go out and negotiate health insurance, the young and healthy wouldn't buy it and the old and sick wouldn't be able to afford it.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 24, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ Libs idea of shit insurance is a policy that doesn't include mammograms and birth control for 50 year old men. And wealthy people paid their own routine Dr visits and held catastrophic policies for emergencies. Obozo said: "Dat no be good. Gotta go with shitty insurance."
> ...


/—-/ It’s settled science that people prefer their healthcare decisions be made by a nameless, faceless, unelected Washington bureaucrats who don’t  care if people live or die. As a benefit that bureaucrats gets healthcare from a private insurer paid with tax payers dollars. Settled science.


----------



## dblack (Oct 24, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> If every last one of us had to go out and negotiate health insurance, the young and healthy wouldn't buy it and the old and sick wouldn't be able to afford it.



Yes. We'd have to face the fact that insurance isn't a social safety net. Trying to use it in that way is idiotic.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 24, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Clearly, the answer is to force people to buy insurance anyway, and have the government make them promise to play nice.
> ...


/----/ Oh you mean if everyone had to go out and negotiate for health insurance like they do for auto, home and life insurance? You mean like that?


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 24, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> MadChemist said:
> 
> 
> > Do you really believe you have an evenly averaged system you make these claims about ?
> ...



Did you answer my question ?

Do you really think your claims apply all across the board ?

As to your numbers, I am not sure what point you were hoping to make there.  It seems out of place.

Also, there are many people who see the doctor without insurance.

It seems your claims are overgeneralizations.

I am not a fan of our current system which fails to make affordable insurance available.


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 24, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ Libs idea of shit insurance is a policy that doesn't include mammograms and birth control for 50 year old men. And wealthy people paid their own routine Dr visits and held catastrophic policies for emergencies. Obozo said: "Dat no be good. Gotta go with shitty insurance."
> ...



I suppose that is the strange part of that argument.  I've had many in my family who have needed surgery and treatment and have never had to argue with an insurance company over anything.

Do I know anyone who has....yes.  But it's not an epidemic.

Again, I don't see our current system as workable......but there is no conversation around what is broken.


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 24, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



I am not sure that argument works either.  

Health insurance is a bit more complex and, the truth is, that we subsidize a great many people in their illnesses.


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 24, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > MadChemist said:
> ...



On this point we agree.  "Junk plans" were never mentioned until Obamacare problematically kicked people out of them.  All of sudden they were useless.

That can be argued separately.

But there is no escaping the fact that they were only attacked when President Obama came under fire after the ACA first kicked in.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 24, 2017)

MadChemist said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


/—-/ it’s complex because of government interference. It was simpler back in the 70s before it was turned into a political football.


----------



## GHook93 (Oct 24, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> 
> Dems rip Trump's 'spiteful' decision to end key ObamaCare payments
> 
> ...



You do realize it is the subscribers to Obamanationcare that will have to front the bill for the lost subsidy and Obamanationcare is ridiculously expensive even with the subsidy.

The naysayers say fuck it don’t get insurance you are young and healthy. Yet accident strikes, do you A. Choose to die or B. Goto the hospital and get stuck with $100k in medical bills?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 24, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /—-/ It’s settled science that people prefer their healthcare decisions be made by a nameless, faceless, unelected Washington bureaucrats who don’t care if people live or die. As a benefit that bureaucrats gets healthcare from a private insurer paid with tax payers dollars. Settled science.



Well, let's look at that. 

Poll: Majority supports single-payer health care

The latest Harvard-Harris Poll survey found 52 percent favor a single-payer system against 48 who oppose it. A strong majority of Democrats — 69 percent — back the idea. Republicans oppose single-payer, 65-35, and independents are split, with 51 percent opposing and 49 supporting.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 24, 2017)

MadChemist said:


> Did you answer my question ?



yes, I did.  Did you need someone to explain the big words to you? 



MadChemist said:


> Also, there are many people who see the doctor without insurance.
> 
> It seems your claims are overgeneralizations.
> 
> I am not a fan of our current system which fails to make affordable insurance available.



but what you don't seem to get is WHY it isn't affordable.  It comes down to Non-value added costs.  

The reason why Single Payer systems work so well is that they have few of those.  No team of clerks in every doctor's officer figuring out how to do medical coding for 50 different insurance companies and providers. No CEO's making Nine Figure salaries. No ramping up the costs for paying customers to write off the loses for people who show up in the emergency room with a fake ID.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 24, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> MadChemist said:
> 
> 
> > Did you answer my question ?
> ...


/—-/ how many bureaucrats does it take to say “treatment denied, go home and die.” I’d say just one per office in fact  they could get the janitor to do it.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 24, 2017)

MadChemist said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > MadChemist said:
> ...


That current system was put in place by only Democrats in the Congress, Senate and Ex President.  They knew it would fail from the start and relied on the "stupid liberal voter" to not hold them accountable, and it worked...


----------



## dblack (Oct 24, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



You don't get it. Health care is a right, just like food and housing and a living wage and basic toiletries, and all these things have to be controlled by government or the rich will eat us. The government will take good care of us because it's WeThePeople and We're never wrong!


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 25, 2017)

dblack said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


/—-/ A Porsche 911 is a fundamental right ( pursuit of happiness) I’ll take a red one, thank you very much


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 25, 2017)

dblack said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


Please show me in the Constitution where it is the right to have healthcare or toiletries or a living wage?  The rights that are supposed to be protected by the Constitution, is written there to keep the fucking government from FORCING us to do things we aren't required to do.  But since the 1/2 white community agitator and the Democrats in the Congress and Senate, they started dismantling those rights.  Which is why now President Trump was put in office, to stop the fundamental transformation of the US into a Venezuela.  And he is Making America Great again, which you libs will end up benefitting from as usual......I keep saying, if you don't like the capitalist system here, where everyone can achieve the American Dream, why are you still here?  Cuba has been opened, the Socialist Utopian Paradise where you will be treated equally, equally poor and equally miserable, with everyone making the same wage except the liberal Castro's.. Go there and leave the rest of US alone, as we don't want your whiney, liberal, petulant, childish, ass here anymore....


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 25, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...


/----/ I think he was being sarcastic.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /—-/ how many bureaucrats does it take to say “treatment denied, go home and die.” I’d say just one per office in fact they could get the janitor to do it.



Wouldn't know. Given the fact that 11% of our spending is spent on prolonging lives in terminal cases, and most of that is Medicare, I would say they are less likely to do that than private insurance. 

Again, numbers speak for themselves, as countries with single payer have longer life expectencies than Americans. 



andaronjim said:


> That current system was put in place by only Democrats in the Congress, Senate and Ex President. They knew it would fail from the start and relied on the "stupid liberal voter" to not hold them accountable, and it worked...



It was working just fine until the Orange Shitgibbon started screwing with it. 

We'll be saying that about a lot of things soon. FEMA, the economy. Working just fine until the Orange Shitgibbon started screwing with it. 



dblack said:


> You don't get it. Health care is a right, just like food and housing and a living wage and basic toiletries, and all these things have to be controlled by government or the rich will eat us. The government will take good care of us because it's WeThePeople and We're never wrong!



Wow, the thing is, only you think those things are horrible, but I don't see you wanting to go back to the bad old days when people starved and shit in chamberpots. 

Libertarians- they don't mind civilization, they just mind contributing to it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Please show me in the Constitution where it is the right to have healthcare or toiletries or a living wage? The rights that are supposed to be protected by the Constitution, is written there to keep the fucking government from FORCING us to do things we aren't required to do. But since the 1/2 white community agitator and the Democrats in the Congress and Senate, they started dismantling those rights. Which is why now President Trump was put in office, to stop the fundamental transformation of the US into a Venezuela. And he is Making America Great again, which you libs will end up benefitting from as usual......I keep saying, if you don't like the capitalist system here, where everyone can achieve the American Dream, why are you still here? Cuba has been opened, the Socialist Utopian Paradise where you will be treated equally, equally poor and equally miserable, with everyone making the same wage except the liberal Castro's.. Go there and leave the rest of US alone, as we don't want your whiney, liberal, petulant, childish, ass here anymore....



Except, Barbie, you didn't win the popular vote.  

Capitalism is a shit sandwich, and people are tired of eating it.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 25, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /—-/ how many bureaucrats does it take to say “treatment denied, go home and die.” I’d say just one per office in fact they could get the janitor to do it.
> ...


/—-/ we have a lower average life expectancy thanks to gang  violence and drug overdoses. How will single payer change any of that?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /—-/ we have a lower average life expectancy thanks to gang violence and drug overdoses. How will single payer change any of that?



Guy, "gang violence" only accounts for 2363 deaths a year.  

Measuring the Extent of Gang Problems

The number of deaths due to drug overdoses is 64,000. 

Overdose Death Rates

so we are talking about a total of 66,000 deaths out of *2,626,418*. a year. 

FastStats

Here are the top causes of death.  All of these could be lowered by greater access to health care. 

*Number of deaths for leading causes of death:*

Heart disease: 633,842
Cancer: 595,930
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 155,041
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 146,571
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 140,323
Alzheimer’s disease: 110,561
Diabetes: 79,535
Influenza and Pneumonia: 57,062
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis: 49,959
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 44,193


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 25, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /—-/ we have a lower average life expectancy thanks to gang violence and drug overdoses. How will single payer change any of that?
> ...



/—-/ how will single payer prevent any of those things?


----------



## dblack (Oct 25, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > You don't get it. Health care is a right, just like food and housing and a living wage and basic toiletries, and all these things have to be controlled by government or the rich will eat us. The government will take good care of us because it's WeThePeople and We're never wrong!
> ...



Nope. You're talking about stingy Republicans. They share your anger about "freeloaders" and hate seeing their taxes go to people who don't do as they're told.

Libertarians, on the other hand, are focused on liberty. What gripes us about government controlling life's necessities is that it will inevitably be used against us. That's _why_ this is happening.

We can take care of ourselves, our families, our neighborhoods, our towns, our cities, our society, *without* resorting to legal mandates, without resorting to a billy club. But some people aren't satisfied with voluntary cooperation, and, frustrated at their inability to convince others to join them (in whatever noble cause they're excited about), want a shortcut. They want to use the law to force others to bend to their will. Nothing about that is civilized.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 25, 2017)

dblack said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...





> stingy Republicans


 Fuck you asshole, without US republicans working and paying taxes you poor welfare liberal pukes wouldn't get a fucking dime for your EBT cards.  Egad man, haven't you ever heard the saying "Don't bite the hand that feeds you?


----------



## dblack (Oct 25, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



See what I mean?


----------



## Vandalshandle (Oct 25, 2017)

Up is down, and down is up in the world of the Conservative. My career as VP of Life and Health Underwriting was over, under ACA. Now, it looks as though conservatives consider insurance companies as "evil" for insuring the uninsurable, but "good" for telling people that they can not buy health coverage at any price, and that they can just get out of sight and die. That is what I did for a living for 50 years, I guess that if my retirement goes south, I can go back to work giving people  death sentences.


----------



## dblack (Oct 25, 2017)

Vandalshandle said:


> Up is down, and down is up in the world of the Conservative. My career as VP of Life and Health Underwriting was over, under ACA. Now, it looks as though conservatives consider insurance companies as "evil" for insuring the uninsurable, but "good" for telling people that they can not buy health coverage at any price, and that they can just get out of sight and die. That is what I did for a living for 50 years, I guess that if my retirement goes south, I can go back to work giving people  death sentences.



I'm not really a "conservative", but I don't consider insurance companies "evil". I consider insurance companies colluding with government to fuck consumers "evil". Especially when they're selling it to idiots as the only solution to a problem they created.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /—-/ how will single payer prevent any of those things?



People will get treatment before these conditions get serious.  People will get to see doctors the first time a pain in the gut bothers them, and not when they are showing up at the ER with an advanced tumor. 

Preventive medicine.  It works.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Fuck you asshole, without US republicans working and paying taxes you poor welfare liberal pukes wouldn't get a fucking dime for your EBT cards. Egad man, haven't you ever heard the saying "Don't bite the hand that feeds you?



Who is really paying those taxes, though, Barbie?  Most of the tax burden is on the working class....


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2017)

dblack said:


> Nope. You're talking about stingy Republicans. They share your anger about "freeloaders" and hate seeing their taxes go to people who don't do as they're told.
> 
> Libertarians, on the other hand, are focused on liberty. What gripes us about government controlling life's necessities is that it will inevitably be used against us. That's _why_ this is happening.
> 
> We can take care of ourselves, our families, our neighborhoods, our towns, our cities, our society, *without* resorting to legal mandates, without resorting to a billy club. But some people aren't satisfied with voluntary cooperation, and, frustrated at their inability to convince others to join them (in whatever noble cause they're excited about), want a shortcut. They want to use the law to force others to bend to their will. Nothing about that is civilized.



Guy, nobody has ever tried a "libertarian" system.... There's a reason for that.  

Because human nature is, you'll take advantage of something and only contribute to it if you feel like it.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 25, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /—-/ how will single payer prevent any of those things?
> ...


/—-/ you’re grasping at straws. Single payer rations care and you know it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /—-/ you’re grasping at straws. Single payer rations care and you know it.



Really?  Because it seems to me that the Single payer countries

1) Spend less
2) Live longer 
3) Have a lower infant mortality rate
4) Have less citizens bankrupted by medical crisis


----------



## dblack (Oct 25, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Nope. You're talking about stingy Republicans. They share your anger about "freeloaders" and hate seeing their taxes go to people who don't do as they're told.
> ...


See what I mean?


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 25, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /—-/ you’re grasping at straws. Single payer rations care and you know it.
> ...


/—-/ and Hillary seemed like a shoe in to you as well.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 25, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /—-/ how will single payer prevent any of those things?
> ...


/—-/ I thought you libtards would like this story: Judge denies emergency request to force Trump administration to resume paying Obamacare insurers reimbursements


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 26, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /—-/ and Hillary seemed like a shoe in to you as well.



Again, she won by 3 million votes, but the very fact that we have  lot of racists and misogynists in this country concerns me. 

four years earlier, 47% of the country was willing to turn the nation over to the Mormon Cult because you all just hated the black guy. 

Now you've turned it over to an insane person because you hated the woman.  

But this is about health care, buddy, let's not get off track.  Where's your "better idea"?  Because you've had seven years to come up with one.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 26, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /—-/ and Hillary seemed like a shoe in to you as well.
> ...


/----"Again, she won by 3 million votes,"  Man are you stuck on stupid.  Trump won 30 states and Hildabeast won 20.  Hillary Clinton only win 57 out of 3,141 counties. And in the Electoral college Trump won 302 votes to Hildabeast's 232.  So Spanky, why do you focus on the irrelevant popular vote totals?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 26, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----"Again, she won by 3 million votes," Man are you stuck on stupid. Trump won 30 states and Hildabeast won 20. Hillary Clinton only win 57 out of 3,141 counties. And in the Electoral college Trump won 302 votes to Hildabeast's 232. So Spanky, why do you focus on the irrelevant popular vote totals?



Because you guys keep claiming Trump has a mandate. 

The people said, "No".  

But again, this is about health care, buddy. Where's your better idea?


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 26, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----"Again, she won by 3 million votes," Man are you stuck on stupid. Trump won 30 states and Hildabeast won 20. Hillary Clinton only win 57 out of 3,141 counties. And in the Electoral college Trump won 302 votes to Hildabeast's 232. So Spanky, why do you focus on the irrelevant popular vote totals?
> ...


/----/ Actually I never said that nor do I recall anyone else saying he has a mandate. I did say he won the election by the only measure that counts, the Electoral College. 
How Trump, With No Mandate, Could Change Washington More Than Reagan Did


----------



## mudwhistle (Oct 26, 2017)

Two Thumbs said:


> It's like the dnc openly bribed ins companies and their lackeys and got their sheep to cheer it on.
> 
> 
> billions added to the debt = meh


It's not like that.....it IS that.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Oct 26, 2017)

in obama care the real winners was not the average folk 

but rather big insurance 

yup cut the funding


----------



## evenflow1969 (Oct 26, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


If insurance companies are evil, you must support a single payer system then right?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 26, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ Actually I never said that nor do I recall anyone else saying he has a mandate. I did say he won the election by the only measure that counts, the Electoral College.



No, the only measure that counts is the will of the people in a democracy.

Not counties. Not states. 

The People. 

The Constitution does not start off with "We the States" or "We the counties". it starts off with "We the PEOPLE". 

And the People said "No!" 



jon_berzerk said:


> in obama care the real winners was not the average folk
> 
> but rather big insurance
> 
> yup cut the funding



Except they know that they can't, as they will be yanking insurance from poor people in the red states.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 26, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > Why have Republicans been so dead set against the ACA? Why 1%er insurance companies fought against the ACA?
> ...


Because, the democrats pushed for health care reform, not a new drug war.


----------



## dblack (Oct 26, 2017)

evenflow1969 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



LOL... you mean like Medicare? Do you think Medicare avoids insurance companies?


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 26, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> MadChemist said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


The republicans had plenty of time to come up with more than, nothing but repeal.  It is why, this person on the left has no reason to take persons on the right, seriously about this issue.


----------



## dblack (Oct 26, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > /----/ Actually I never said that nor do I recall anyone else saying he has a mandate. I did say he won the election by the only measure that counts, the Electoral College.
> ...



Very funny. The entire zeitgeist of the Constitution is to put a cap on how much the Will of the People can be forced on society via government.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 26, 2017)

danielpalos said:


> Because, the democrats pushed for health care reform, not a new drug war.



They pushed for it because the system was obviously broken and still is.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Oct 26, 2017)

dblack said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...


I mean axe the insurance companies completely. Government ran. It is the only way to get rid of them. And yes they are fucking evil. Insurance and prisons are the two places that I do not think private companies can do the best job.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 26, 2017)

dblack said:


> Very funny. The entire zeitgeist of the Constitution is to put a cap on how much the Will of the People can be forced on society via government.



Yes. It also called blacks 3/5th of white people, and has a lot of other problems.  

Again, I like living in a modern society with roads and police and fire protection and sanitation and libraries. I don't mind paying taxes for them. The rich should pay their fair share, as they get more out of it than I do. 

You know, instead of spending billions brainwashing idiot libertarians.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 26, 2017)

dblack said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...


Yet during the last 8 years the will of the people(stupid liberal voters) FORCED upon the rest of US the unaffordable healthcare act.  Now you libtards too stupid to know better, are screaming at the Republicans who need to fix the shit your Dimwitcrats broke.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Oct 26, 2017)

evenflow1969 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > evenflow1969 said:
> ...


/----/ Axe the insurance companies completely??? So what happens if your car is stolen, your house catches fire or your widow needs income?  What then?


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 26, 2017)

evenflow1969 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > evenflow1969 said:
> ...





> prisons are the two places that I do not think private companies can do the best job


 In Saudi Arabia you are punished for the crimes you do. If you steal from someone you would have your hand cut off. No repeat offenders.  If you killed or raped another person your head would be separated from your shoulders, no repeat offender.  Prisons are overcrowded with liberal voters because the libs who are killing 33,000 born and unborn babies a month, have to do whatever they can to save the party.

Terry McAuliffe's Second Try at Restoring Felon Voting Rights


> Weeks after the Virginia Supreme Court ruled that the governor’s order giving 200,000 ex-offenders back the franchise was unconstitutional, he’s trying a different method.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Oct 26, 2017)

Cellblock2429 said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...


From health care. For me I do not need them my house is paid for, my car is paid for, and I have saved for retirement. I maintain my house not likely to catch fire. I am divorced so fuck her!!!


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 26, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Yet during the last 8 years the will of the people(stupid liberal voters) FORCED upon the rest of US the unaffordable healthcare act. Now you libtards too stupid to know better, are screaming at the Republicans who need to fix the shit your Dimwitcrats broke.



Naw, we'd be just as happy if you just left it alone, which is what you are pretty much going to end up doing, anyway.


----------



## task0778 (Oct 26, 2017)

It is hard to understand the progressive liberal position on this.   They hate the evil corporations, but when Trump cuts off gov't subsidies to the big insurance corps they're all up in arms cuz it hurts the lower and middle classes.   But wait, isn't that a contradiction?   They are against cutting taxes for big corps but for paying large subsidies to the same big corps?   I believe I am smelling the stink of double talk and hypocrisy here on the part of the Dems.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Oct 26, 2017)

task0778 said:


> It is hard to understand the progressive liberal position on this.   They hate the evil corporations, but when Trump cuts off gov't subsidies to the big insurance corps they're all up in arms cuz it hurts the lower and middle classes.   But wait, isn't that a contradiction?   They are against cutting taxes for big corps but for paying large subsidies to the same big corps?   I believe I am smelling the stink of double talk and hypocrisy here on the part of the Dems.




they hate evil corporations unless it helps a leftist cause 

also bringing up a stupid 3/5ths rule sounds a lot like the leftard 

is pissed the south did not have more electoral votes 

which is why the rule came about in the first place 

--LOL

leftards are always full of nonsense


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 26, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> MadChemist said:
> 
> 
> > Did you answer my question ?
> ...



In truth, you didn't.  

I asked if you believed our healthcare system could be characterized as a single system.

Your response said something about the uninsured (which was not accurate).

So, I'll ask again.

Do you believe you can characterize the health care system that exists within a population of 325,000,000 people with single variables that are applicable across the entire spectrum.


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 26, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> MadChemist said:
> 
> 
> > Also, there are many people who see the doctor without insurance.
> ...



First, where have I made statements regarding why it isn't affordable ?

Please share them.

Second, CEO salaries don't impact that system. This appears to be class envy.  If you want to argue against high salaries, do ahead.  I'll probably be on on your side.  But it doesn't fly here.

Finally, while I agree overhead costs are an issue, they are not the only issue. 

I don't get the feeling you are really interested in discussing anything. 

Are you really interested in A solution or YOUR solution.


----------



## otto105 (Oct 26, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> 
> Dems rip Trump's 'spiteful' decision to end key ObamaCare payments
> 
> ...



You really don't understand what you're posting about.


----------



## otto105 (Oct 26, 2017)

task0778 said:


> It is hard to understand the progressive liberal position on this.   They hate the evil corporations, but when Trump cuts off gov't subsidies to the big insurance corps they're all up in arms cuz it hurts the lower and middle classes.   But wait, isn't that a contradiction?   They are against cutting taxes for big corps but for paying large subsidies to the same big corps?   I believe I am smelling the stink of double talk and hypocrisy here on the part of the Dems.



No, you're intentionally distorting what the payments are set up to accomplish and then comparing apples to oranges in true idiotic conservative fashion..


----------



## dblack (Oct 26, 2017)

evenflow1969 said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > evenflow1969 said:
> ...



Why do we need to get rid of them? Why do you think health care is as choice between submitting to government authority or submitting to the insurance companies? Is it completely impossible for you to imagine doing neither? Wouldn't that be better?


----------



## dblack (Oct 26, 2017)

task0778 said:


> It is hard to understand the progressive liberal position on this.   They hate the evil corporations, but when Trump cuts off gov't subsidies to the big insurance corps they're all up in arms cuz it hurts the lower and middle classes.   But wait, isn't that a contradiction?   They are against cutting taxes for big corps but for paying large subsidies to the same big corps?   I believe I am smelling the stink of double talk and hypocrisy here on the part of the Dems.



Democrats like corporations when they are colluding with, or wait... I think they say "partnering with", government to take control of, I mean "take care of", the needs of society.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 27, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Because, the democrats pushed for health care reform, not a new drug war.
> ...


Nothing but repeal, was never any form of solution.  

yet, it was all the right wing had.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 27, 2017)

MadChemist said:


> So, I'll ask again.



I already explained it to you. I'm sorry you lack the comprehension skills to understand my answer, but you seem a bit dopey.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 27, 2017)

dblack said:


> Why do we need to get rid of them? Why do you think health care is as choice between submitting to government authority or submitting to the insurance companies? Is it completely impossible for you to imagine doing neither? Wouldn't that be better?



Yeah, clearly DYING A HORRIBLE DEATH IN POVERTY is an option.  And it's the reality for the 43 million people who didn't have insurance before the ACA.  But, um, "Freedom" or something.  

So here we get to the crux of the argument. 

Health care is either a commodity where you can get what you can afford.  The problem is, only the rich can have that easy access to it for something serious.  

Or it's a public service that everyone should have equal access to. 

The rest of the world decided it should be the latter, and created single payer or universal coverage systems. 

America decided on the former, because some slimy people got rich off the deal, and they have Rich Sugar Daddies telling Libertarian Idiots that this is about "Freedom". 

Sorry, I don't feel free if I have to worry about being bankrupted by cancer, or if I get cut off at the knees by an insurance company that decided my treatment was "elective".  

Single Payer IS Freedom. It's one less thing I have to worry about.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 27, 2017)

otto105 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > Hey liberals, the justice department is taking its appeal to have billions of money to give to the insurance companies and stop the monthly payments, are you now happy that these EVIL corps are no longer getting that corporate welfare?
> ...





> You really don't understand what you're posting about


 Oh no, I really do know what I am talking about..


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 27, 2017)

Health care is part of the general welfare.

Welfare spending should be cut last; after cuts to defense spending.  The right wing cannot be serious about our alleged wars, if they believe cutting taxes will help us win them.

I believe cuts to social spending in favor of defense spending is ethically wrong and unconstitutional, without a formal declaration of war and the war time tax rates necessary to pay for them.


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 27, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> MadChemist said:
> 
> 
> > So, I'll ask again.
> ...



That's simply a deflection.

You did not explain anything.

If you don't want to explain it (or can't) just be adult enough to say so.

I will avoid the name calling as that seems to be your forte.


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 27, 2017)

danielpalos said:


> Health care is part of the general welfare.



While I don't defend the current system, this statement is blatantly false.

I am all for conversations around how things should work, but this claim is simply not true (and is a huge source of error).


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 27, 2017)

MadChemist said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Health care is part of the general welfare.
> ...


Why do you believe, the general welfare does not include welfare regarding health care?  It is not the major or common welfare.


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 27, 2017)

danielpalos said:


> MadChemist said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



Let me step back and apologize for jumping to conclusions.

I may have been reading something into your statement that you didn't mean.

The General Welfare Clause of The U.S. Constitution specifically relates to the identified duties of the federal government as specified in the constitution.  People will use this as a blanket argument to justify the Federal Government getting involved in just about anything.

However, if you are referring to the general welfare of people, I would agree that health care is a big part of that.  Especially, given our aging population.

Again, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 27, 2017)

MadChemist said:


> You did not explain anything.



Yes, I did. It just wasn't the answer you wanted to hear.  

That's totally not my problem.


----------



## debbiedowner (Oct 27, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> otto105 said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...



that picture of you with your head up your ass fits your statement "I really do know what I'm talking about" perfect. Seems repubs are the biggest recipients of insurance monies. 

Health Insurance Companies Give Healthy Donations to Political Campaigns - FollowTheMoney.org 266


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Oct 27, 2017)

debbiedowner said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > otto105 said:
> ...


So you do like that your taxes are going for corporate welfare to insurance companies with Obama care?


----------



## debbiedowner (Oct 27, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> debbiedowner said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...



Not any more than I like my taxes going to any corporate welfare and there is plenty of it. Why don't you asked IRS how your taxes are getting distributed?


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 27, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> MadChemist said:
> 
> 
> > You did not explain anything.
> ...



What answer did I want to hear ?

I asked a question that is basically set up to frame the conversation.

Do you think you can characterize the U.S. system as a single system.

You answered there were 47 million uninsured.

You didn't say where they were or if they were equally distributed throughout the population.

In fact, you really said not much at all.

But feel free to think you are somehow behaving like an adult.

It's not taken long to figure out who the partisans are on this board.


----------



## koshergrl (Oct 27, 2017)

Two Thumbs said:


> It's like the dnc openly bribed ins companies and their lackeys and got their sheep to cheer it on.
> 
> 
> billions added to the debt = meh



Like?
That's exactly what happened.
It's a racket. Everything the left does is a racket.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 27, 2017)

MadChemist said:


> Do you think you can characterize the U.S. system as a single system.



Yes. Yes, I can.   Thanks.  



MadChemist said:


> You answered there were 47 million uninsured.



Yes, and that's fucking unacceptable and causes most of the problems..I realize you are kind of dopey and don't understand symbiotic relationships, like hospitals charging people $100 for an aspirin to cover the uninsured in the ER, but that's the system we have.  



MadChemist said:


> It's not taken long to figure out who the partisans are on this board.



That's okay, I doubt you'll be here long enough.


----------



## sakinago (Oct 31, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> > I don't want to give poor people any more money... They have taken 22 trillion dollars and did nothing but stay poor. Before FDR put a chicken in everyone's pot, people had to work, or find charity to survive.
> ...



Ridiculous, who says people who are considered rich don’t or never worked hard to get where they are at??? Just a ridiculous and gross mid generalization. And while they only own 45% of the wealth, the top 20% pays for 95% of the tax burden...And if they got rich by providing a product or service for people at a price people they were willing to pay for it...what’s the problem?? If they made their money honestly, what the hell is the problem? Why are they second class citizens. And many of these people worked hard and made plenty of money, carefully saved and invested (investing as in helping others provide a product and service to humanity), just to set up the next generation of their family for success...making sure their progeny has every advantage possible....like all parents/grandparents should do. Is that a crime??? Holy shit, so parents setting up a college fund, and grandparents doing a savings fund is wrong? And if the parents/grandparents toiling gave them that advantage, and they used it, that’s somehow wrong??? That’s absurd. 

Now if they cheated and scammed their way up, that’s a different story. But, You’d be a moron to suggest that every, or even most of “rich” people got there dishonestly. The people who are getting there dishonestly are usually doing it through the help of government, not despite it. So the problem is government, not the rich. And the other part of the problem is you see what they have, and don’t think it’s fair...in other words, straight up jealousy.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Nov 1, 2017)

sakinago said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > andaronjim said:
> ...





> cheated and scammed their way up,


 Like the expired Clinton Crime Foundation?  Liberals will circle the wagons and shove their heads way up Uranus when you call out their Rapist in Chief and enabler of that rapist......


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 1, 2017)

sakinago said:


> Ridiculous, who says people who are considered rich don’t or never worked hard to get where they are at??? Just a ridiculous and gross mid generalization.



They did not perform 45% of the physical labor. 



sakinago said:


> And while they only own 45% of the wealth, the top 20% pays for 95% of the tax burden...



Okay, if you can't get the numbers straight, there's really no point talking to you.  The top 20% controls 87% of the wealth.  THAT'S The problem. The top 1% controls 45% of the wealth. IF they are paying more of a single kind of tax, that's because they have most of the goodies to start with. 



sakinago said:


> And if they got rich by providing a product or service for people at a price people they were willing to pay for it...what’s the problem??



The problem is. 

Someone else designed it, but they were usually under an intellectual property clause where they won't see the profit. 

Someone else built it, but they usually work in a third world sweatshop.

Someone else sold it, but they are usually working for minimum wage at a big box store and the rest of us have to pick up his health care and food stamps.  

SOOOOOO.... again, the problem with you people who worship the rich is that you've mistaken a parasite for a vital organ.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 1, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> Like the expired Clinton Crime Foundation? Liberals will circle the wagons and shove their heads way up Uranus when you call out their Rapist in Chief and enabler of that rapist......



Or we just don't look at every problem int he world as "but, but, but... Hillary!!!!"


----------



## sakinago (Nov 1, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> sakinago said:
> 
> 
> > Ridiculous, who says people who are considered rich don’t or never worked hard to get where they are at??? Just a ridiculous and gross mid generalization.
> ...


I don’t at all worship the rich, I’m just not jealous of them, big difference. If you’ve worked hard, got really good at something, or came up with a great idea that improves people’s lives, and that makes you rich...the. good for you. I hope to be as lucky. You seem to have this false assumption that the rich all of a sudden become rich when they turn 18, and boom they are now CEOs. That there was zero hard work, late nights, labor, lots of their own money poured into an idea, lots of risks taken, a lot of learning from bad choices, and making good choices, or a stroke of genius or even luck that got them there. And if they were born into money, well good job to their parents/ancestors for setting them up so well. 

You also have a notion that you’re locked into your class you were born into. That’s just not the case. In America I think the stat is that 50% of the population winds up in the top 10% for at least a year at some point in their life. So you probably won’t start out rich, but got a a good shot to get there someday in America. 

I don’t understand why you think zero work goes into being rich, or that why labor deserves to be rich...just doesn’t make sense


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 1, 2017)

sakinago said:


> You also have a notion that you’re locked into your class you were born into. That’s just not the case. In America I think the stat is that 50% of the population winds up in the top 10% for at least a year at some point in their life. So you probably won’t start out rich, but got a a good shot to get there someday in America.



Bullshit.  If anything, the Middle class my parents enjoyed is a thing of the past, because the Rich don't want us to have that  



sakinago said:


> I don’t understand why you think zero work goes into being rich, or that why labor deserves to be rich...just doesn’t make sense



I'm sure a lot of things don't make sense to a brainwashed zombie like you.


----------



## sakinago (Nov 1, 2017)

JoeB131 said:


> sakinago said:
> 
> 
> > You also have a notion that you’re locked into your class you were born into. That’s just not the case. In America I think the stat is that 50% of the population winds up in the top 10% for at least a year at some point in their life. So you probably won’t start out rich, but got a a good shot to get there someday in America.
> ...


You think I worship rich people, and I’m the brainwashed one...I really don’t care about them, if they or their grandparents or whatever made their money honestly, by providing something that has made life better for people, then good for them. If they got there by getting rules bent in their favor, or by flat out cheating, we’ll then shame on them. Here’s the difference between you and me, I look at everything on a case by case basis. I don’t think all the rich people have teamed up against the poor, that’s just a ridiculous notion you keep throwing around. Are there rich people trying to pull up the ladder so they can stay rich without having to adapt, or throw red tape at the competition that they can’t afford, or forcing other to use them as a middle man, yes absolutely...but guess what, they cannot do that WITHOUT THE HELP OF GOVERNMENT BENDING THE RULES IN THEIR FAVOR. Which is why I am for freer markets, because they can’t petition the government for getting the rules made in their favor. They usually do that by lobbying FOR MORE REGULATION, not less, even when it hurts them. Because smaller and newer competition can not afford to compete and stay compliant with regulation (let alone figure out what staying within regulation actually means). Or better yet all competition is FORCED by regulation to have to go through the big wigs in that industry. So even if that regulation hurts the big wigs, it helps them in the long run since it’s so hard for any newer, cheaper, smarter, streamlined competition to compete.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 1, 2017)

Yawn, guy, I get bored listening to "Free Market Cultists" tell me that our biggest problem is the rich people aren't free enough to exploit us.  

We had our greatest prosperity when the workforce was unionized, the industries were regulated and the rich were taxed to the nines...


----------



## Issa (Nov 4, 2017)

Healthcare system in the US is the biggest scam in human's history IMHO.....people pay hundreds of dollars every month, and when they need an MRI they have to pay hundreds of dollars of co-pay and thousands in other procedures....it's ridiculous. a one night stay at the hospital for a small procedure, the insureance was charged 24k....just unbelievable.....I could've taken the plane overseas got the procedure done, spent 2 weeks vacation and still not 40% of what the insurance paid. Both parties are accomplice and americans are the victims, someone needs to lead the masses to get to the bottom of this....and no it's not the orange he's a big piece of the problem in this country, a 1% conman opportunist.


----------



## GHook93 (Nov 5, 2017)

andaronjim said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...



Loved when he told the smug and arrogant Don “Dumbass Champaign Liberal” Lemon “the pie is not finite” and “Bullshit.”

Suck Lemon!


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------

