Where It All Ends....

[NYcarbineer]

Why would they do that? is it better to have the government waste billions? Competition is a good thing and profit is also good, gives people jobs

The government is the inefficient one in the health insurance business? Not true.

1. Medicare is government health insurance. It has a medical loss ratio of about 98%. What does that mean? It means that 98% of Medicare's collected premiums get spent on actual healthcare.

2. Obamacare requires private healthcare insurance companies to get their medical loss ratios up to 85% (or refund the difference) much less efficient than Medicare but still much better than business as usual at the private insurance companies.

...that is Obamacare...trying to make private for profit insurance companies at least somewhere near as efficient as the government program.

Medicare doesn't send out bills. Social Security does.

Medicare doesn't collect bills, SS does.

Medicare doesn't investigate Medicare Fraud (which is off the scale) the DoJ does. And not very well. Medicare fraud is between 10% and 20% of all claims paid depending on who you choose to believe. An absolutely ASTONISHING NUMBER.

There is no underwriting department in Medicare. They send out no renewals, they don't cancel people, they don't advertise....

IOW, they don't do jack shit. Nothing. Zero. Zilch. They don't even pay for postage.

All the "Cost of doing Business" of Medicare is shifted onto other departments of the Federal government. So we have NO idea what their true Profit/Loss/Expense Ratio is.

None. But I would assume it's fairly low. I'd estimate somewhere between 85% and the absurdly ridiculous and idiotic 98%. Probably closer to the 85% mark that Health Insurers strive for

No wonder you fell for it.

ETA:

Know what else Medicare doesn't do?

They don't pay Individual damages in lawsuits. They don't settle in or out of Court on Individual cases.

And even if they do get sued by a Patriotic Group, the DoJ covers all the legal expenses

Try suing Medicare and let me know how you make out.

The Legal Department in a Health Insurance Company is one of its most expensive operations.

And obamacare didn't even address that..... Curious, huh?

lol, your unsupported denial is noted.

 

[Jroc]

Do the Republicans have a healthcare plan that gets the for-profit corporations out of the healthcare business,

or in any way impedes their ability to profiteer off the consumer?

Why would they do that? is it better to have the government waste billions? Competition is a good thing and profit is also good, gives people jobs

It was the poster I responded to who was complaining about corporations making money.

Again, what is the Republican plan to replace Obamacare with a healthcare law which is not, as the other poster put it,

"the law which is robbing the middle class for the benefit of the big corporations"?

The American Health Care Reform Act | Republican Study Committee (RSC)

 

[daveman]

[
Considering Obama's economy has put record numbers of Americans on public assistance, you might want to rethink who you're blaming for gutting the middle class.

Of course, that assumes you thought about it the first time, which is doubtful.

No, not really.

Obama didn't sign idiotic trade treaties that sent the jobs overseas.

Obama didn't push for "Right to Work", "At Will Employment" and all the other erosions of labor protections Americans fought for.

Blaming Obama for the ruin you guys have been inflicting on the middle class for 30 years is truly dishonest. I mean, guys like Rottweiler and Templar are too young to know any better, but you're old enough to remember what a middle class looked like and how it was gone by the Oughts...

Are you really denying the negative impact Obama's policies have had on the economy?

Dood. That's like denying that water is wet, or that Communism is a complete and utter failure.

Oh, sorry -- didn't mean to pour salt in the wound.

 

[daveman]

The problem with using excessively dramatic, hyperbolic, exaggerated, hysterical rhetoric in making a criticism is that its value as a convincing argument depends on no one ever seeing the reality of the situation being sensationalized.

Yeah, yeah, Obama is the bestest President ever.

Yawn.

 

[daveman]

Why do the Rich need an army of working class/middle class conservatives to defend them?

Can't they defend themselves?

They're too busy paying most of the taxes.

 

[daveman]

Probably lots.

You see, I'll give you an example.

Let's say you have a crazy rich guy who decides he wants to sell SHIT sandwiches. Doesn't matter how much capital he invests in the factory, advertising, whatever, no one wants to eat a shit sandwich.

You only have commerce and jobs if you have DEMAND. Consumer Demand. And the money of welfare recipiants create more demand than rich people do.

That's why Food Stamps are issued by the Department of Agriculture. It's to keep DEMAND of food up so that farmers keep growing it.

It's why the bankers make home loans based on welfare. There's a demand for housing, they find a way to meet it.

The idea that the uber wealthy are indispensible is just laughable. They are a parasite that have convinced you they are a vital organ.

I've never seen a welfare recipient sign a payroll check.

And neither have you.

I've seen lots of food stamp recipients buying food. It's not the employee who keeps the supermarket in business,

it's the customer.

And yet, if it weren't for the guy signing the checks and making the decisions, the business wouldn't be there.

You think running a supermarket is easy? Try it. Bear in mind the average supermarket has a profit margin of about 1 percent.

Good luck. You'll need it.

 

[daveman]

Signing the checks is the creation of the job, guy.

Signing the check just means you had to pay for the labor to get the demands met.

Demand goes away, so do the payrolls.

And this is where you guys fucked it up. In your quest to get obscene profits, you gutted the middle class.

And then wondered why the "demand" disappeared.

Considering Obama's economy has put record numbers of Americans on public assistance, you might want to rethink who you're blaming for gutting the middle class.

Of course, that assumes you thought about it the first time, which is doubtful.

The GOP created the crash of 2008. The Obama administration has been trying to dig us out of the hole they created. And the whole time, the GOP has been trying to put us back into that hole. Simple fact. The GOP has opposed each and every bill that would put Americans to work on our crumbling infrastructure.

Ahhh. So you believe the best way to get out of a hole is to tunnel entirely through the planet.

Obama thanks you for your mindless, unthinking support.

 

[daveman]

Is that supposed make sense? No wonder you're so easily exploitable.

and you suppose your bolded idiocy makes sense? no wonder the low information worker like yourself is called the sheeple

The Rich get defended by conservatives here every day. In fact, I'd say that nothing upsets a rightwing inmate on this forum more than when someone criticizes the Rich. The Rich have a godlike hold over the right.

Go ahead, blame the poor for everything that's wrong in your life. That's what the Rich have trained you to do.

Go ahead, blame the rich for everything that's wrong in your life. That's what Communists have trained you to do.

 

[daveman]

Got to love it when clueless liberals think Republicans are only for so-called Rich. Look around moron, it's Democrat policies that are hurting the poor and there are more rich liberal politicians than rich conservatives....Stupid talking points not much thinking going on there

dimocrap policies are hurting the middle class THE MOST.

dimocrap policies are helping the rich - the most and they are generally neutral to the poor.

obamacare and it's implementation is the perfect example - the law which is robbing the middle class for the benefit of the big corporations is a classic dimocrap policy.

however, it is the most outrageously confiscatory.

Do the Republicans have a healthcare plan that gets the for-profit corporations out of the healthcare business,

or in any way impedes their ability to profiteer off the consumer?

Oh...so you're AGAINST Obamacare.

 

[daveman]

The government is the inefficient one in the health insurance business? Not true.

1. Medicare is government health insurance. It has a medical loss ratio of about 98%. What does that mean? It means that 98% of Medicare's collected premiums get spent on actual healthcare.

2. Obamacare requires private healthcare insurance companies to get their medical loss ratios up to 85% (or refund the difference) much less efficient than Medicare but still much better than business as usual at the private insurance companies.

...that is Obamacare...trying to make private for profit insurance companies at least somewhere near as efficient as the government program.

Medicare doesn't send out bills. Social Security does.

Medicare doesn't collect bills, SS does.

Medicare doesn't investigate Medicare Fraud (which is off the scale) the DoJ does. And not very well. Medicare fraud is between 10% and 20% of all claims paid depending on who you choose to believe. An absolutely ASTONISHING NUMBER.

There is no underwriting department in Medicare. They send out no renewals, they don't cancel people, they don't advertise....

IOW, they don't do jack shit. Nothing. Zero. Zilch. They don't even pay for postage.

All the "Cost of doing Business" of Medicare is shifted onto other departments of the Federal government. So we have NO idea what their true Profit/Loss/Expense Ratio is.

None. But I would assume it's fairly low. I'd estimate somewhere between 85% and the absurdly ridiculous and idiotic 98%. Probably closer to the 85% mark that Health Insurers strive for

No wonder you fell for it.

ETA:

Know what else Medicare doesn't do?

They don't pay Individual damages in lawsuits. They don't settle in or out of Court on Individual cases.

And even if they do get sued by a Patriotic Group, the DoJ covers all the legal expenses

Try suing Medicare and let me know how you make out.

The Legal Department in a Health Insurance Company is one of its most expensive operations.

And obamacare didn't even address that..... Curious, huh?

lol, your unsupported denial is noted.

Your claim is unsupported. You gonna get around to proving it, or do you expect us to just take your word for it?

Because that's not going to happen, no matter how much you stamp your feet.

 

[JoeB131]

[
Are you really denying the negative impact Obama's policies have had on the economy?

Dood. That's like denying that water is wet, or that Communism is a complete and utter failure.

Oh, sorry -- didn't mean to pour salt in the wound.

Gee, guy, I'm sorry, not seeing any "failure of Communism" in my life.

I'm still seeing a HUGE failure of Corporatism, though. For the last thirteen years.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

[
Are you really denying the negative impact Obama's policies have had on the economy?

Dood. That's like denying that water is wet, or that Communism is a complete and utter failure.

Oh, sorry -- didn't mean to pour salt in the wound.

Gee, guy, I'm sorry, not seeing any "failure of Communism" in my life.

I'm still seeing a HUGE failure of Corporatism, though. For the last thirteen years.

Communists are totally against ownership, especially of their legacy if failure and poverty

So you were a Republican.

LOL

Funny stuff

 

[daveman]

[
Are you really denying the negative impact Obama's policies have had on the economy?

Dood. That's like denying that water is wet, or that Communism is a complete and utter failure.

Oh, sorry -- didn't mean to pour salt in the wound.

Gee, guy, I'm sorry, not seeing any "failure of Communism" in my life.

I'm still seeing a HUGE failure of Corporatism, though. For the last thirteen years.

Communism failed.

You're really fucking stupid.

 

[Spoonman]

dimocrap policies are hurting the middle class THE MOST.

dimocrap policies are helping the rich - the most and they are generally neutral to the poor.

obamacare and it's implementation is the perfect example - the law which is robbing the middle class for the benefit of the big corporations is a classic dimocrap policy.

however, it is the most outrageously confiscatory.

Do the Republicans have a healthcare plan that gets the for-profit corporations out of the healthcare business,

or in any way impedes their ability to profiteer off the consumer?

Why would they do that? is it better to have the government waste billions? Competition is a good thing and profit is also good, gives people jobs

not to mention that in order to get the healthcare insurance lobbyist to support and push for Obamacare Obama gave them a great deal of input to drafting the plan. there were no controls put on them by the democrats. none at all

 

[Vox]

[
Are you really denying the negative impact Obama's policies have had on the economy?

Dood. That's like denying that water is wet, or that Communism is a complete and utter failure.

Oh, sorry -- didn't mean to pour salt in the wound.

Gee, guy, I'm sorry, not seeing any "failure of Communism" in my life.

I'm still seeing a HUGE failure of Corporatism, though. For the last thirteen years.

Communists are totally against ownership, especially of their legacy if failure and poverty

So you were a Republican.

LOL

Funny stuff

oh, c'mon. the guy is as red a commie as it is possible

he was never a republican. hey, he might be too extreme even for dimocraps

 

[JoeB131]

[
Are you really denying the negative impact Obama's policies have had on the economy?

Dood. That's like denying that water is wet, or that Communism is a complete and utter failure.

Oh, sorry -- didn't mean to pour salt in the wound.

Gee, guy, I'm sorry, not seeing any "failure of Communism" in my life.

I'm still seeing a HUGE failure of Corporatism, though. For the last thirteen years.

Communists are totally against ownership, especially of their legacy if failure and poverty

So you were a Republican.

LOL

Funny stuff

No, guy, my underwater mortgage and busted 401K and having to work three jobs is not in the least bit funny.

Communists didn't do this to me. Capitalists and Republicans did.

 

[JoeB131]

Gee, guy, I'm sorry, not seeing any "failure of Communism" in my life.

I'm still seeing a HUGE failure of Corporatism, though. For the last thirteen years.

Communists are totally against ownership, especially of their legacy if failure and poverty

So you were a Republican.

LOL

Funny stuff

oh, c'mon. the guy is as red a commie as it is possible

he was never a republican. hey, he might be too extreme even for dimocraps

Again, anyone who is still a Republican after 2008 is a complete Retard. That should be the kind of thing that ends political parties.

You do get that, right? That you got everything you wanted, and it resulted in the biggest failure ever. Please, please, please tell me that you don't have your head so far up other women's hoo-has that you don't see how badly they fucked everything up.

Oh, wait. Abortion. Got to have our priorities.

 

[Geaux4it]

Shouldn't they all have realized how their message could be interpreted in a sick mind?

I'm with ya but the last line is a step to far, IMHO the answer to that question is "no".


But the drumbeat of anger, envy, hate and blame is undeniable. The preaching of the indefensible economics of the early 20th century is amazingly callous. The politicization of literally everything is intolerably cruel and malicious.

Nearly all of it stems from the poison philosophy of pathological altruism. Worst of all, it was all disproved after WWII and then the fall of Communism. Knowing these facts, the political far left ought to not only get the just blame for the horrid results of their policies. It's long past time they stop getting credit for their so called "good intentions".

There is no excuse for not knowing better. There is no reason for their actions but the naked greed of an insatiable lust for power.

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote Democrat.

I would rather have a sister in the house of ill-repute than have a brother that votes democrat.

-Geaux

 

[NYcarbineer]

"The Liberal playbook begins and ends with dividing Americans."

Is that meant to imply that the Conservative playbook doesn't?

lol, indeed...

 

[PoliticalChic]

"The Liberal playbook begins and ends with dividing Americans."

Is that meant to imply that the Conservative playbook doesn't?

lol, indeed...

Once again, like Mighty Mouse....I am here to save the day!

Clearly, you have not the slightest clue whereof you speak.


1. "The Democrats have a serious problem. It is a problem that stems from the party’s greatest strength: its long-term support for inclusion and equal rights for all, its support of racial integration and equal rights for women and homosexuals and its humane stand on immigration reform. Those heroic positions … caused an understandable, if misguided, overreaction within the party–a drift toward identity politics, toward special pleading. Inclusion became exclusive. The Democratic National Committee officially recognizes 14 caucuses or “communities,” most having to do with race, gender, sexual orientation or ethnicity."
http://douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/04/the-democrats-identity-politics-problem/?_r=0



And now to explain why that is anti-American and wrong:

2. "If “fairness” is associated with group-identity, with all of the associated accommodations, law will be reduced to constant petition of government for special and specific exemptions from justice. Law, to be just, but be written and carried out in ignorance of the identity of its claimants."
Mamet, "The Secret Knowledge," chapter 23.