Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The point is there are other countries that have good healthcare systems, with good patient satisfaction and lower costs than our own. Yet, you refuse to acknowledge them? Why? Because every system, EVERY system in the world is more "socialist" than our system. EVERY SINGLE ONE and the fact that you wont name a country tells me that you know this on some level.
So instead of me naming which systems are rated better than ours, I'll let you tell me which system you like. Then we can discuss why. But you won't because you're a partisan hack whose only joy in life comes from complaining about commies and socialists.
You use the word "good" here like it means something. What do you mean by "good"?
Every one of those systems is beset with soaring costs and vain efforts to contain them. Go Google "health care costs Britain" Or France. Or Germany. Every one of them is in trouble.
Even then their populations are generally healthier than ours and their costs would be lower anyway.
And none of them hold a candle to our healthcare costs. And that's before Obamacare was ever imagined. So your whole "soaring costs" argument is moot.
Here's a modest proposal:
The Obamacare roll out and the rough time people have had getting insurance have led to many people not being able to get affordable insurance. If they can't prove they have insurance they will have to pay the penalty under Obamacare.
To help them out, let's let people opt out of the mandate. Perhaps they can simply make a statement that complying is a hardship and that will excuse them from the penalty.
What do you think?
The point is there are other countries that have good healthcare systems, with good patient satisfaction and lower costs than our own. Yet, you refuse to acknowledge them? Why? Because every system, EVERY system in the world is more "socialist" than our system. EVERY SINGLE ONE and the fact that you wont name a country tells me that you know this on some level.
So instead of me naming which systems are rated better than ours, I'll let you tell me which system you like. Then we can discuss why. But you won't because you're a partisan hack whose only joy in life comes from complaining about commies and socialists.
I keep saying I like our system the best, even though government has for decades over regulated and mandated it. And I keep saying all our peers are socialist now, so there is no comparable system. Any free medical country is third world. I am not getting the logic in your repeating when that's my view to name other countries I like regarding their system. We are the standard, and as socialists, you're on a lifelong quest to strangle the goose that laid the golden egg so we can all be poor and equal. Except our political leaders.
And like I said, you refuse to acknowledge other systems that are rated well.....even, *gasp* better than ours. Why is that you refuse to admit that perhaps we aren't the best?
Here's a modest proposal:
The Obamacare roll out and the rough time people have had getting insurance have led to many people not being able to get affordable insurance. If they can't prove they have insurance they will have to pay the penalty under Obamacare.
To help them out, let's let people opt out of the mandate. Perhaps they can simply make a statement that complying is a hardship and that will excuse them from the penalty.
What do you think?
Hardship exemptions are already in the law.
Here are the necessary forms:
If you live in a state using Healthcare.gov: http://marketplace.cms.gov/getoffic...-and-articles/affordability-ffm-exemption.pdf
If you live in a state using its own exchange: http://marketplace.cms.gov/getoffic...-and-articles/affordability-sbm-exemption.pdf
/thread
The German system does a better job giving the people a choice when choosing their healthcare than our system IMO.
Other countries have far more efficient systems. The US system is able to do ok because we throw so much more money at it than other countries.
And none of them hold a candle to our healthcare costs. And that's before Obamacare was ever imagined. So your whole "soaring costs" argument is moot.
You understand that's a non sequitur, right?
LOL. You just use terms that don't apply whatsoever when you have no place else to turn. Good for you.
I keep saying I like our system the best, even though government has for decades over regulated and mandated it. And I keep saying all our peers are socialist now, so there is no comparable system. Any free medical country is third world. I am not getting the logic in your repeating when that's my view to name other countries I like regarding their system. We are the standard, and as socialists, you're on a lifelong quest to strangle the goose that laid the golden egg so we can all be poor and equal. Except our political leaders.
And like I said, you refuse to acknowledge other systems that are rated well.....even, *gasp* better than ours. Why is that you refuse to admit that perhaps we aren't the best?
Again, what do you mean "rated better"? That is very subjective, depending on what you're measuring. But I'll bet that's too abstract for you.
The German system does a better job giving the people a choice when choosing their healthcare than our system IMO.
Other countries have far more efficient systems. The US system is able to do ok because we throw so much more money at it than other countries.
Time to learn from those countries.
And like I said, you refuse to acknowledge other systems that are rated well.....even, *gasp* better than ours. Why is that you refuse to admit that perhaps we aren't the best?
Again, what do you mean "rated better"? That is very subjective, depending on what you're measuring. But I'll bet that's too abstract for you.
Rated on several factors...if you're truly interested. Here is just one study for example.
"U.S. Ranks Last Among Seven Countries on Health System Performance Based on Measures of Quality, Efficiency, Access, Equity, and Healthy Lives"
U.S. Ranks Last Among Seven Countries on Health System Performance Based on Measures of Quality, Efficiency, Access, Equity, and Healthy Lives - The Commonwealth Fund
You understand that's a non sequitur, right?
LOL. You just use terms that don't apply whatsoever when you have no place else to turn. Good for you.
Darn, I knew you were just too stupid to understand something like that.
Yes, your statement was a non sequitur. Just because other countries' health care systems cost less than ours does not mean they cannot experience soaring costs. Just to spell it to you because you're rather stupid.
Here's a modest proposal:
The Obamacare roll out and the rough time people have had getting insurance have led to many people not being able to get affordable insurance. If they can't prove they have insurance they will have to pay the penalty under Obamacare.
To help them out, let's let people opt out of the mandate. Perhaps they can simply make a statement that complying is a hardship and that will excuse them from the penalty.
What do you think?
Hardship exemptions are already in the law.
Here are the necessary forms:
If you live in a state using Healthcare.gov: http://marketplace.cms.gov/getoffic...-and-articles/affordability-ffm-exemption.pdf
If you live in a state using its own exchange: http://marketplace.cms.gov/getoffic...-and-articles/affordability-sbm-exemption.pdf
/thread
And that exemption has been extended for 2 years.
ObamaCare's Secret Mandate Exemption - WSJ.com
If the mandate was at the center of Obamacare, which is what the gov't argued to the SC, then why is it being put off?
LOL. You just use terms that don't apply whatsoever when you have no place else to turn. Good for you.
Darn, I knew you were just too stupid to understand something like that.
Yes, your statement was a non sequitur. Just because other countries' health care systems cost less than ours does not mean they cannot experience soaring costs. Just to spell it to you because you're rather stupid.
You used other nations "soaring costs" as a negative, where as our country has even greater soaring costs before Obamacare. Thus, like I said, your point is moot. Back to the drawing board for you!
Hardship exemptions are already in the law.
Here are the necessary forms:
If you live in a state using Healthcare.gov: http://marketplace.cms.gov/getoffic...-and-articles/affordability-ffm-exemption.pdf
If you live in a state using its own exchange: http://marketplace.cms.gov/getoffic...-and-articles/affordability-sbm-exemption.pdf
/thread
And that exemption has been extended for 2 years.
ObamaCare's Secret Mandate Exemption - WSJ.com
If the mandate was at the center of Obamacare, which is what the gov't argued to the SC, then why is it being put off?
The individual mandate was not extended for two years. It was extended for those whose coverage was cancelled.
Again, what do you mean "rated better"? That is very subjective, depending on what you're measuring. But I'll bet that's too abstract for you.
Rated on several factors...if you're truly interested. Here is just one study for example.
"U.S. Ranks Last Among Seven Countries on Health System Performance Based on Measures of Quality, Efficiency, Access, Equity, and Healthy Lives"
U.S. Ranks Last Among Seven Countries on Health System Performance Based on Measures of Quality, Efficiency, Access, Equity, and Healthy Lives - The Commonwealth Fund
Right. So it's pretty meaningless because you can pick and choose factors to make whatever case you want.
In fact, the only thing that matters is that when people get sick they get effective treatment in time. And the US ranks #1 in that.
Rated on several factors...if you're truly interested. Here is just one study for example.
"U.S. Ranks Last Among Seven Countries on Health System Performance Based on Measures of Quality, Efficiency, Access, Equity, and Healthy Lives"
U.S. Ranks Last Among Seven Countries on Health System Performance Based on Measures of Quality, Efficiency, Access, Equity, and Healthy Lives - The Commonwealth Fund
Right. So it's pretty meaningless because you can pick and choose factors to make whatever case you want.
In fact, the only thing that matters is that when people get sick they get effective treatment in time. And the US ranks #1 in that.
Link?
You use the word "good" here like it means something. What do you mean by "good"?
Every one of those systems is beset with soaring costs and vain efforts to contain them. Go Google "health care costs Britain" Or France. Or Germany. Every one of them is in trouble.
Even then their populations are generally healthier than ours and their costs would be lower anyway.
And none of them hold a candle to our healthcare costs. And that's before Obamacare was ever imagined. So your whole "soaring costs" argument is moot.
You're the only one focusing only on "cost." Actually, the Euro socialists are in the 10-12 percent range of gdp, which is a big chunk of what we pay. We also have better care and that doesn't count what they spend privately since that's not official health care spending.
So if you saved a few bucks but couldn't get an appointment if you have cancer and die waiting you consider that a net win? Really?
Darn, I knew you were just too stupid to understand something like that.
Yes, your statement was a non sequitur. Just because other countries' health care systems cost less than ours does not mean they cannot experience soaring costs. Just to spell it to you because you're rather stupid.
You used other nations "soaring costs" as a negative, where as our country has even greater soaring costs before Obamacare. Thus, like I said, your point is moot. Back to the drawing board for you!
It is hardly moot. Those systems of other nations produced soaring health care costs that have necessitated painful reform. Thus emulating them will guarantee we will get the same result.
Whether our country has experienced soaring costs or not is irrelevant to the fact that those other countries with their systems did. Thus the non sequitur.
You flunked logic, right?
Right. So it's pretty meaningless because you can pick and choose factors to make whatever case you want.
In fact, the only thing that matters is that when people get sick they get effective treatment in time. And the US ranks #1 in that.
Link?
https://www.google.com/
Right. So it's pretty meaningless because you can pick and choose factors to make whatever case you want.
In fact, the only thing that matters is that when people get sick they get effective treatment in time. And the US ranks #1 in that.
Link?
https://www.google.com/
How about single payer modeled after our public educational system.
Great idea.
Obamacare doesn't suck nearly bad enough.
Let's bring in Single Payer (i.e. 100% govt-provided health insurance), and we'll soon wish we had Obamacare back!
Sounds like a plan!
