***Paul Krugman admits DEATH PANELS***

[auditor0007]

Death Panel is what RW a-holes and dupes call end of life counseling with family and doctors.

O-care will save tons of money. End of life counseling, your own doctor and preventive care instead of the ER, low cost clinics, guidelines to cut malpractice, no more bankruptcy, limits on profit and advertising and salaries, and a ton of other stuff that dupes have not been told about, and media has done a terrible job of discussing, from fear of loudmouth idiot RWers...

Who needs end of life counseling? Right wingers live forever.

 

[francoHFW]

Sure try to- maybe fear of judgement. lol

 

[P@triot]

g and kon bugged out, it was getting to hot for them..

You have to understand Roo, anything above a 3rd grade level is too hot for G-string. That's why he gets so angry. He's wrong, he knows people who can think have him pinned against a wall, and that causes him to become more and more unhinged with each post until he's actually contradicting himself.... (can only imagine what his mothers basement looks like when he's done with his tantrums)

 

[P@triot]

For the adults: Why the “Death Panel” Myth Wouldn’t Die: Misinformation in the Health Care Reform Debate

So let me get this straight - even though Paul Krugman just admitted it, you're still going to go with the narrative that it is a "myth"

And even though every nation who has implemented state run healthcare has them, you're still going to go with the narrative that it is a "myth"

Just curious g-string, what else is a "myth" in your world? Lions? The world being round? Gum? Oxygen?

 

[P@triot]

Show me the death panels!

g5000: "Show me oxygen! Can't do it? That's because it doesn't exist! If I can't see it, it doesn't exist!"

 

[P@triot]

I just love how liberals ALWAYS end up trying to work boths sides of every argument. One year ago all we heard was how stupid conservatives are for thinking that O-care would have a death panel --- now they sit there and go, "Well duh, we knew that the gov't would have to decide that some people weren't going to get the help they needed."

...and it's OK --- So much crap.

I find it amazing each and every time. You could not have said it any better

The fact is, they will deny something (just like Bill Clinton) until the DNA evidence from the cum stain makes it impossible to deny. Then, at that point, they either change the subject or just move the goalposts.

In this case, the new narrative (like you said) is "well duh, what do you expect us to do - pay for people on life support indefinitely?". It really is fuck'n hilarious. I know it shouldn't be because they are destroying our country, but I guess I just have a sick sense of humor, because it really does make me laugh hard each and every time.

 

[P@triot]

I am going to bed now, the lesson here is that there is ALWAYS someone who knows more than you about everything...you just happened to step in it because its what I do....

Now tomorrow why don't you bring up say......knitting, I don't know shit about that.

And there you go. Dashing for the exit.

Looks like I need more floss.

Well of course you do - think of how much of my sperm is between your teeth right now from all the loads of mine you swallowed in the WMD thread. I owned like no one has been owned before on USMB.

In your desperation, you're now claiming that the WMD's were (and I quote) "not large enough stockpiles to go to war over".

First there were no WMD's, now he's changed to "well, there were, but.....:

 

[P@triot]

I am going to bed now, the lesson here is that there is ALWAYS someone who knows more than you about everything...you just happened to step in it because its what I do....

Now tomorrow why don't you bring up say......knitting, I don't know shit about that.

LMAO! I've thoroughly enjoyed watching you own g-string Roo! Good stuff...

 

[P@triot]

Death Panel is what RW a-holes and dupes call end of life counseling with family and doctors.

O-care will save tons of money. End of life counseling, your own doctor and preventive care instead of the ER, low cost clinics, guidelines to cut malpractice, no more bankruptcy, limits on profit and advertising and salaries, and a ton of other stuff that dupes have not been told about, and media has done a terrible job of discussing, from fear of loudmouth idiot RWers...

Who needs end of life counseling? Right wingers live forever.

Ah! Yet another code word for "death panels" to go right along side of "allocation of resources" and "rationing".

And.... just like "pro-choice" (which is actually pro-MURDER), "end of life counseling" sounds so gentle, honorable, and educational. One thing about liberals - they will never call something what it is. That's why they loathe the term "death panel". In their mind, it's not "death" it's "end of life counseling"

For thousands and thousands of years, man has not required "end of life counseling". But the very second the government gets involved with our healthcare, it's not only a requirement, it's also a "good" thing...

 

[P@triot]

pardon me, but I'm half awake, ehausted, and brain dead.

Can someone explain to me what a death panel is?
I think that this is a conspiracy or false, I've never heard such a thing. And I'd be suprised if people actually supported it.

Since the government has limited resources to attempt to support unlimited healthcare issues, they will need to deny people the healthcare they need. So, the "Death Panel" will be government bureaucrats deciding whether your life is worth funding or not.

Here is an example (*key word here folks - an example):

An otherwise health 8-year old is found to have a genetic degenerative condition with his heart, requiring a transplant. At the same time, you the 68-year old with diabetes also needs a heart transplant.

The panel might decide that you've lived your life, you have other costly healthcare problems, and they will refuse your request for a heart transplant, while granting it to the 8-year old boy.

On the other hand, the panel might decide that the 8-year old boy will be a lifetime of costs (standard stuff like the flu, broken bones, etc.) and letting him die now will save them an average of "x" amount of dollars over his life. They might determine that granting you the heart transplant at 68 is the smarter move because you'll be dead within 10 years anyway and then they will save on healthcare costs at that time by having both you and the 8-year old boy dead.

It just depends on who sits on the panel, what the state of the budget is, what the projections are, etc. But at the end of the day, neither you nor your doctor are involved in any capacity. You're a cost to the "state" and that state will decide whether or not you are worth that cost

 

[francoHFW]

Counseling is NOT death panels, dupes.

Unions get a WAIVER until their contracts are up, 2017 at most. So, STFU, MORONS. TY

 

[francoHFW]

It may not be perfect, but it's better than an insurance bureaucrat cutting you off or dropping you on a technicality, fear mongered chumps.

 

[P@triot]

I'm actually virulently opposed to ObamaCare, but my reasons are valid.

Which illustrates why you're such an asshole. You come here and argue with everyone, just for the sake of arguing. Even people you agree with, you argue with.

You're just a dick. Nobody likes you. Which is why so many have you on ignore (and I'm about to join that bunch because it's so irritating trying to have a discussion and watching you make shit up because you're butt-hurt over taking a beating with facts).

Do us a favor - either go away or grow up. But stop trying to get off on getting a rise out of people. You're just an asshole that nobody likes.

 

[P@triot]

It may not be perfect, but it's better than an insurance bureaucrat cutting you off or dropping you on a technicality, fear mongered chumps.

No, it's not better. Not at all. You're just lying now about insurance companies because of your love of communism and statism....

With an insurance company, I enter into an agreement voluntarily and I known ahead of time what the binding contractual obligations of the insurance company are before I enter into the agreement.

That is not the case with the government. They make no contractual guarantees. I can't leave them for a better deal/price/coverage/etc. if I want to. And they can randomly decide at any time they want to let me die.

If an insurance company tries that, they are taken to court and are forced to uphold their end of the contract.

Want to have an honest conversation now or are you going to continue with this bullshit because you fear the facts?

 

[nitroz]

pardon me, but I'm half awake, ehausted, and brain dead.

Can someone explain to me what a death panel is?
I think that this is a conspiracy or false, I've never heard such a thing. And I'd be suprised if people actually supported it.

Since the government has limited resources to attempt to support unlimited healthcare issues, they will need to deny people the healthcare they need. So, the "Death Panel" will be government bureaucrats deciding whether your life is worth funding or not.

Here is an example (*key word here folks - an example):

An otherwise health 8-year old is found to have a genetic degenerative condition with his heart, requiring a transplant. At the same time, you the 68-year old with diabetes also needs a heart transplant.

The panel might decide that you've lived your life, you have other costly healthcare problems, and they will refuse your request for a heart transplant, while granting it to the 8-year old boy.

On the other hand, the panel might decide that the 8-year old boy will be a lifetime of costs (standard stuff like the flu, broken bones, etc.) and letting him die now will save them an average of "x" amount of dollars over his life. They might determine that granting you the heart transplant at 68 is the smarter move because you'll be dead within 10 years anyway and then they will save on healthcare costs at that time by having both you and the 8-year old boy dead.

It just depends on who sits on the panel, what the state of the budget is, what the projections are, etc. But at the end of the day, neither you nor your doctor are involved in any capacity. You're a cost to the "state" and that state will decide whether or not you are worth that cost

If we have universal health care, then anyone should be able to recieve health care without discrimination. It's not about saving a buck. It's about being able to help the less fortunate.



But I found that Conservatives such as Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin supported death panels.


And I found that death panels don't exist. Why talk of non-existent Obamacare death panels won?t die

 

[JoeB131]

So conservatives want the government to fund every medical procedure/treatment/option available to keep anyone alive for as long as possible, for any reason, if that's what the person wants?

Really?

Don't make us laugh.

That is awesome! First you guys claim that death panels would "never" happen and this was all "right-wing propaganda".

Now, all of a sudden, the new narrative is "well yeah, what do you want, the government to pay for people to live for ever"?

God damn, this is conservative GOLD here! You can't buy this kind of comedy....

There are already death panels... but they are run by private insurance.

Ask Natalie Sarkisyan about "Death Panels". Except in her case, the death panel decided Ed Hanaway's 73 Milion dollar salary was more important than her liver transplant.

A bit different than saying that you aren't going to keep a terminally ill patient alive for a couple more weeks in agonizing pain when you can just make him comfortable.

 

[dblack]

So conservatives want the government to fund every medical procedure/treatment/option available to keep anyone alive for as long as possible, for any reason, if that's what the person wants?

Really?

Don't make us laugh.

That is awesome! First you guys claim that death panels would "never" happen and this was all "right-wing propaganda".

Now, all of a sudden, the new narrative is "well yeah, what do you want, the government to pay for people to live for ever"?

God damn, this is conservative GOLD here! You can't buy this kind of comedy....

There are already death panels... but they are run by private insurance.

Ask Natalie Sarkisyan about "Death Panels". Except in her case, the death panel decided Ed Hanaway's 73 Milion dollar salary was more important than her liver transplant.

A bit different than saying that you aren't going to keep a terminally ill patient alive for a couple more weeks in agonizing pain when you can just make him comfortable.

You're missing the point. It isn't that these decisions will get made, but how. They can be a private family matter, a contractual agreement with an insurance company, or by decree of the state. The last option subjects our personal health decisions to, at best, majority rule - at worst, the "rule" of whomever has the most influence over government regulatory agencies.

 

[JoeB131]

You're missing the point. It isn't that these decisions will get made, but how. They can be a private family matter, a contractual agreement with an insurance company, or by decree of the state. The last option subjects our personal health decisions to, at best, majority rule - at worst, the "rule" of whomever has the most influence over government regulatory agencies.

But that's the problem, isn't it?

Families would spend whatever was necessary to keep a loved one alive, even for a few more weeks, even it was hopeless.

Insurance companies would spend as little as possible, letting people die of treatable diseases if it improved their profit margins. And as I point out, in the Sarkisyan case, the contract was between the employer and the insurance company, not the policy holder.

The government would probably be a median result. They'll keep alive those who can be saved, but have to draw a line somewhere sensible.

Again, every country in the world has single payer, universal coverage except us. They live longer, have lower infant mortality, spend a lot less, and medical crisis don't cause 62% of bankruptcies like they do here.

I worry more about rich people who would fuck me over to make more money that a government that simply wants me to keep voting for it.

 

[dblack]

You're missing the point. It isn't that these decisions will get made, but how. They can be a private family matter, a contractual agreement with an insurance company, or by decree of the state. The last option subjects our personal health decisions to, at best, majority rule - at worst, the "rule" of whomever has the most influence over government regulatory agencies.

But that's the problem, isn't it?

Families would spend whatever was necessary to keep a loved one alive, even for a few more weeks, even it was hopeless.

No, I don't think that's the case. If they're spending their own money, families will be making better value decisions than either insurance companies or the government.

Insurance companies would spend as little as possible, letting people die of treatable diseases if it improved their profit margins. And as I point out, in the Sarkisyan case, the contract was between the employer and the insurance company, not the policy holder.

Which is why we've been fools to accept health insurance as an employment 'benefit'. And even bigger fools to use tax policy to support it.

The government would probably be a median result. They'll keep alive those who can be saved, but have to draw a line somewhere sensible.

Sorry, but I just can't work up that much naive optimism about government decision making. This is the worst of the three, in large part because government programs aren't voluntary. We'll be forced to pay for them, one way or another, and then be dependent on the fickle nature of government policy as to whether we get any return on our investment.

Again, every country in the world has single payer, universal coverage except us.

Yes corporatism is a worldwide trend. Some of us are suggesting we find a better route.

 

[dblack]

I worry more about rich people who would fuck me over to make more money that a government that simply wants me to keep voting for it.

This really gets to the core of it. Tell me this much, when is the last time you were mugged by a rich person? Have you ever been arrested by a corporation? Of course not. The power of wealth has limits. To extend their control further, they must employ government - and they do. How much more power do you want to give them?