The blueprint for prosperity

[P@triot]

I'm not wealthy. Never said I was. Yet another illustration of your reading comprehension problems.

If you aren't wealthy, you can't get the best healthcare.

Want to bet? Before Obamacare, I had a cadillac healthcare plan. Cost me $172 per month for my entire family, never pay more than $20 for a medication, and had absolutely no cap. If it cost us $60 million for a healthcare issue, the $60 million was covered in full. Thanks for playing.

 

[P@triot]

You can get the health care that your insurance is willing to pay for. If they decide that they don't want to pay for your treatment, you won't get it.

You have to love liberal "logic". In post #312 Joey whines like a toddler that someone else decides your healthcare and that's why it sucks. But then in post #318 he brags that socialized medicine is sooooo much better because someone else decides your healthcare.

What offends you is limiting resources on need rather than by ability to pay.

Yes folks...progressives really are this stupid. Talk to them long enough and they will contradict their own position every time.

 

[JoeB131]

You're damn right! Limiting resources offends the hell out of me. Some dillhole in government abusing his power and playing God - deciding for others how much food, money, and healthcare they get offends the hell out of me.

But the One Percent doing it so they can buy more dressage horses, that doesn't bother you in the least.

Here's the thing. We can vote that dillhole in the government out if we don't like the way he's doing his job.

So let's review. We both agree, there are limited amounts of money to go around for health care. True, the US ends up spending twice as much as most other industrialized countries and gets much worse results. So how should that be limited.

By ability to pay, or by medical need?

Because 11% of what we spend in this country, after you take out the profits taken by Big Pharma, Insurance and Medical, is spent prolonging the lives of the terminally ill. They are going to die, regardless, but we bankrupt their families stretching it out.

We're a meritocracy. Deal with it sweetie. Either earn it or accept that you didn't.

Or not. Sorry, I don't think we should let poor children die because their daddies don't earn enough or walked out on their moms.

I'm sorry that in your fucked up, Ayn Rand reading world, you do. I honestly have to wonder what happened to you as a child to make you such a truly awful person.

If any of that were even remotely true - people wouldn't come from all over the world to receive healthcare here in the U.S. Mexicans wouldn't sneak into our nation.

First, medical tourism is myth. That a rich person can fly here and get treatment that most Americans don't have access to is nothing to be proud of.

Second, comparing us to third world countries is hardly anything to be proud of. That Cuba after 50 years of economic warfare being waged on it STILL has a lower infant mortality rate than we do is something we ought to be embarrassed about.

 

[JoeB131]

Want to bet? Before Obamacare, I had a cadillac healthcare plan. Cost me $172 per month for my entire family, never pay more than $20 for a medication, and had absolutely no cap. If it cost us $60 million for a healthcare issue, the $60 million was covered in full. Thanks for playing.

Amazing it's always the Right Wingers who have suddenly suffered horribly under ObamaCare.

Get used to it, buddy, it's here to stay.

You have to love liberal "logic". In post #312 Joey whines like a toddler that someone else decides your healthcare and that's why it sucks. But then in post #318 he brags that socialized medicine is sooooo much better because someone else decides your healthcare.

Yes, you clearly miss the point.

Someone deciding not to pay for a treatment because it won't change the outcome... I can understand that.

Someone deciding not to pay for a treatment because Cigna needs to pay their CEO a nine-figure separation package... meh, not so much.

 

[P@triot]

But the One Percent doing it so they can buy more dressage horses, that doesn't bother you in the least.

The 1% doesn't control resources, snowflake. They have absolutely no control over my money, my assets, my healthcare, etc. The only entity that possibly could is government. Which is why you root for them despite their appalling history of corruption.

 

[NYcarbineer]

An astounding 80% drop in food stamps recipients in just over one year, and a 114% increase in incomes. Who could possibly argue with these results?

Maine did not reduce the number of people on food stamps by 80%.

You are profoundly retarded.

 

[P@triot]

Here's the thing. We can vote that dillhole in the government out if we don't like the way he's doing his job.

Really? Ok snowflake - do it. Do it today. Vote him out of the White House by 11:00 p.m. this evening. If you can't (and I assure you, you can't) then you have just been exposed as the pathological liar that you are.

Here's the real thing - I can choose to not do business with any company in the world. If I don't like McDonald's, I don't have to buy their burgers. I refuse to purchase a single thing from Target and have convinced all of my family and friends as well.

But I'm permanently stuck with the U.S. government. Barack Insane Obama was a disgusting anti-constitutional marxist. I wanted no part of him. Yet I was stuck with him for 8 years. I haven't even been stuck with Target for 8 minutes. I told them to go fuck themselves two years ago and that was that. I've been stuck with Nancy Pelosi's corrupted ass for 30 years.

And the truth is - that's exactly why you want everything done through government. Because you want to control people at the barrel of a gun. You're a typical Benito Mussolini little man - only without the ambition and the talent to ascend to his level (thank God).

 

[P@triot]

Maine did not reduce the number of people on food stamps by 80%. You are profoundly retarded.

Your denial of reality has run its course here on USMB, NY Crabby Queer. Your insistence on pushing idiotic propaganda - likewise.

Since you can't accept video, documentation, government statistics, etc. - it's time for you to move along. I'm sure there is a left-wing fascist "Antifa" site just dying for another useful idiot such as yourself.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Maine did not reduce the number of people on food stamps by 80%. You are profoundly retarded.

Your denial of reality has run its course here on USMB, NY Crabby Queer. Your insistence on pushing idiotic propaganda - likewise.

Since you can't accept video, documentation, government statistics, etc. - it's time for you to move along. I'm sure there is a left-wing fascist "Antifa" site just dying for another useful idiot such as yourself.

Ok, you tell us.

How many Maine residents were on food stamps before this regulation.

How many are NOW on Food Stamps?

 

[P@triot]

So let's review. We both agree, there are limited amounts of money to go around for health care. True, the US ends up spending twice as much as most other industrialized countries and gets much worse results. So how should that be limited.

By ability to pay, or by medical need?

Yes...let's review. After denying that there would be "Death Panels" under the left's utopian view of healthcare, you are now acknowledging that is exactly what will occur under left-wing idiocy.

So how should limited resources be limited? By a person's ability to earn it. A fuck'n heroin addict shouldn't receive healthcare on my dime. A fuck'n meth head shouldn't receive healthcare over my children. They earned their misery - they deserve every bit of it (and worse). Conversely, I've earned cadillac healthcare for myself and my family.

 

[P@triot]

Ok, you tell us.

I don't have to tell you - the government of Maine already did.

How many Maine residents were on food stamps before this regulation.

80% more

How many are NOW on Food Stamps?

80% less

 

[P@triot]

Get used to it, buddy, it's here to stay.

The American people disagree with you, snowflake (as usual). It's already been repealed in the House. Just waiting for it to be repealed in the Senate. And if it is - you can best your ass President Trump will sign it.

 

[P@triot]

Sorry, I don't think we should let poor children die because their daddies don't earn enough or walked out on their moms.

No...instead you believe we should force wealthy children to die as a punishment for their fathers getting a good education, working hard, and becoming captains of industry. Idiot.

 

[P@triot]

So let's review. We both agree, there are limited amounts of money to go around for health care. True, the US ends up spending twice as much as most other industrialized countries and gets much worse results. So how should that be limited.

By ability to pay, or by medical need?

This was the headline in the London Daily Telegraph today. Over 1 million people per day in England can't even see a general practitioner. It would be absolutely comical - SNL skit like comical - if it wasn't so tragic. And this is the type of failed healthcare that LWNJ's want to bring here to America.

 

[JoeB131]

he 1% doesn't control resources, snowflake. They have absolutely no control over my money, my assets, my healthcare, etc. The only entity that possibly could is government. Which is why you root for them despite their appalling history of corruption.

The only reason why the government is "corrupt" is because they've bought out one party.

The beauty of Republicans. They complain how government is the problem, and when they get in charge, they truly fuck things up.

 

[JoeB131]

This was the headline in the London Daily Telegraph today. Over 1 million people per day in England can't even see a general practitioner. It would be absolutely comical - SNL skit like comical - if it wasn't so tragic. And this is the type of failed healthcare that LWNJ's want to bring here to America.

How many Americans can't see a GP because they don't have one?

so instead of cherry picking headlines, let's look at statistics.

What the NHS 'A&E crisis' looks like in comparison to America's private healthcare

That makes it sounds like American healthcare is faster, but there is a statistical detail that is very important here: The 93.4% number for the NHS is for the complete treatment of all patients arriving for emergency care. The 95% number for the US is the average wait time for a patient to see a doctor.

In other words, Americans get to see a doctor after a three-hour wait. Brits will have seen a doctor and been treated within four hours.

If you want quick emergency care, the UK is still the place to be.

 

[JoeB131]

No...instead you believe we should force wealthy children to die as a punishment for their fathers getting a good education, working hard, and becoming captains of industry. Idiot.

Okay, let's look at that. By your logic, the rich should be able to harvest transplant organs from the poor because they are more successful, then?

Yes...let's review. After denying that there would be "Death Panels" under the left's utopian view of healthcare, you are now acknowledging that is exactly what will occur under left-wing idiocy.

No more than the board at Cigna that decided not to pay for Nataline Sarkisyan's liver transplant was a "Death Panel" This would be AFTER her father paid for insurance, by the way.

So how should limited resources be limited? By a person's ability to earn it. A fuck'n heroin addict shouldn't receive healthcare on my dime. A fuck'n meth head shouldn't receive healthcare over my children. They earned their misery - they deserve every bit of it (and worse). Conversely, I've earned cadillac healthcare for myself and my family.

Why, because you are a little suckup who fetches coffee for the Big Man?

Look, I'm not sure what happened to you at an early age where you lack any humanity or compassion.

 

[JoeB131]

Get used to it, buddy, it's here to stay.

The American people disagree with you, snowflake (as usual). It's already been repealed in the House. Just waiting for it to be repealed in the Senate. And if it is - you can best your ass President Trump will sign it.

Naw, it's going to die in the senate.... Too many Republican Senators heard from their redneck constituents who just figured out the ACA was the same thing as ObamaCare.

 

[JoeB131]

Here's how the UK compares to the US

United Kingdom vs United States: Health Facts and Stats

Hospital beds >Per 1,000 people
UK: 4.2 per 1,000 people Ranked 33th. 27% morethan United States
US 3.3 per 1,000 people Ranked 37th.

Life expectancy at birth, total >
UK Years 80.75 Ranked 22nd. 3% more than United States
US 78.64 Ranked 40th.

Quality of health care system >Cost
UK 79.76 Ranked 7th. 74% more than United States

Infant mortality rate > Total
UK: 4.62 deaths/1,000 live births Ranked 184th.
US 6.06 deaths/1,000 live births Ranked 171st. 31% more than United Kingdom

Expenditure per capita > Current
UK - 2,899.7$ Ranked 18th.
US - 6,096.2$ Ranked 1st. 2 times morethan United Kingdom

So let's review, shall we.

We spend twice as much per capita, but we don't live as long, we have more of our infants die in infancy, and we pretty much trail the UK in every metric.

But... um, Eek, Socialism! Poodle live in mortal fear a poor person will get the same quality of care he gets.

 

[P@triot]

This is how socialized medicine always ends. This family raised $1.6 million and would like to take their baby to the U.S. for treatment. It won't cost the U.K. government a dime. And yet they are holding the baby hostage and will soon execute the defenseless little baby.

They can't use cost as an excuse as they aren't footing the bill. So what is the deal? It's the same deal it always is with the left - power and control over the helpless and defenseless. They want to execute this baby just to make sure the people understand who is in control (hint: it's not the parents as it should be).

UK Death Panel Rules Baby Should ‘Die With Dignity,’ History Teaches Brutal Lesson of What Comes Next