It is sad that you think money paid for health services is evil if it is paid via taxes instead of through insurance premiums, even if the total amount spent is lower by removing the insurance company profit.
Imagine actually believing that the government can provide services more efficiently than the free market, because "pr0fit!!!111!!"...lol profit is the reason WHY it's more efficient.
The 20 countries that have all done it, disagree with your blind faith in the invisible hand when it comes to health care services.
Just because they've all done it doesn't mean it wouldn't be more efficient if they hadn't.
They all rank above us in efficiency and coverage.
Which proves nothing for 2 reasons:
1) The US has nothing close to a free market health care system. It's heavily influenced by government.
2) The overall efficiency of healthcare is determined by more factors than just government policy. If the efficiency and coverage really is better than the US in any of those countries, it would be even more efficient if their healthcare providers operated under the realm of a free market.
Sounds like you prefer entities with a profit motive to make health care decisions for you. Have you ever known anyone who got sick and their insurance pulled? Or the insurance company denied a necessary surgery because it costs too much?
I'm not in favor of government overegulation. But there are some things the government need to step in.
Have you ever considered that everything has a cost, and that allowing people to be free allows for equilibrium spending for services? It's often times extremely expensive to give somebody a slight extension of their life, and as horrible as it might sound, sometimes it's really not worth it.
There is no magic formula to make everyone happy. If a doctor came up to me and said "Mr bender123, you have ________, and you're going to die in 3 months unless we perform this surgery on you which costs $400,000. And if you do have the surgery, you're probably only gonna live for another 3 years." I'd say it probably isn't worth it. If I had the money, sure I'd pay it. But I wouldn't sit there and cry about how everyone else should be forced to chip in to give me a slight life extension.
Government is already a huge reason why everything costs so much. Shortage of doctors, for example. That's inflating the salary of doctors, and costing everyone money when they want to see one. What's preventing the country from having a steady supply? Regulations. You can't just start practicing medicine, you've got to go through a whole bunch of shit, have enough money to pay for the excess barriers to business, and be approved by a board of existing doctors who have an incentive to keep the supply short. For example, there are a lot of perfectly qualified and experienced doctors who could start practicing, but we don't let them because they can't get residency acceptance due to having been educated in other parts of the world. Fucked up.
You didn't answer my questions. But I'll ask you this additional question. What is your proposed solution then?
I've probably known a person who's lost their insurance after getting sick. I know people who have been dropped from their car insurance after getting in a wreck, too. It's really the same concept.
It costs a lot of money to fix cars and people. If we force insurance companies to cover everyone regardless of any ailments, those costs will be felt by everyone, not just the insurance companies.
This was the plan from the get go. The administration knew they couldn't get a single payer system passed, so they came up with a system that would be sure to fail. Once it fails, single payer will be the only option. Pretty sick if you ask me.
Pretty much every other advanced country has single payer or some kind of similar "evil" socialized medicine
Then go live there and fuck off.
love it or leave it response from the pothead. No surprise.
You do know that healthcare is about 18% of GDP vs. about 8-12 in the other countries and people are charged 400 times as much for pills as in those countries.
Do you think it may be related to the diets and the failure of the FDA to allow giants such as Conagra to provide cheap, instant blood sugar spiking foods to the masses... Just maybe???
Since the FDA has done such a bang up job with the regulation of our food. I'm sure the Federal Government would do even better at further control of health care.
Every Looberal says so.
So then, maybe we should do something about corporate lobbying and the round robin between corporations and regulating agencies.
It is fucking hilarious how people want to blame the gov't while ignoring the corporate lobbying that controls the gov't.
Lobbying is a problem with government, not corporations. Every single person who's ever assumed real authority, control, and power over others has had people who try and bribe them in some way. It's a completely natural response to having your freedoms stripped.
This was the plan from the get go. The administration knew they couldn't get a single payer system passed, so they came up with a system that would be sure to fail. Once it fails, single payer will be the only option. Pretty sick if you ask me.
Pretty much every other advanced country has single payer or some kind of similar "evil" socialized medicine
Then go live there and fuck off.
love it or leave it response from the pothead. No surprise.
You do know that healthcare is about 18% of GDP vs. about 8-12 in the other countries and people are charged 400 times as much for pills as in those countries.
Do you think it may be related to the diets and the failure of the FDA to allow giants such as Conagra to provide cheap, instant blood sugar spiking foods to the masses... Just maybe???
Since the FDA has done such a bang up job with the regulation of our food. I'm sure the Federal Government would do even better at further control of health care.
Every Looberal says so.
So then, maybe we should do something about corporate lobbying and the round robin between corporations and regulating agencies.
It is fucking hilarious how people want to blame the gov't while ignoring the corporate lobbying that controls the gov't.
Lobbying is a problem with government, not corporations. Every single person who's ever assumed real authority, control, and power over others has had people who try and bribe them in some way. It's a completely natural response to having your freedoms stripped.
It's not even bribery, as something illicit. Lobbying is a protected right, as in "to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." With a growing government bootprint, more and more economic activities are subject to influence. The simple but very difficult answer to the influence of in government is to take the money out of government to begin with. Politicians and bureaucrats with little discretionary spending are going to find very few invites to St. Kits.
It is sad that you think money paid for health services is evil if it is paid via taxes instead of through insurance premiums, even if the total amount spent is lower by removing the insurance company profit.
Imagine actually believing that the government can provide services more efficiently than the free market, because "pr0fit!!!111!!"...lol profit is the reason WHY it's more efficient.
The 20 countries that have all done it, disagree with your blind faith in the invisible hand when it comes to health care services.
Just because they've all done it doesn't mean it wouldn't be more efficient if they hadn't.
They all rank above us in efficiency and coverage.
Which proves nothing for 2 reasons:
1) The US has nothing close to a free market health care system. It's heavily influenced by government.
2) The overall efficiency of healthcare is determined by more factors than just government policy. If the efficiency and coverage really is better than the US in any of those countries, it would be even more efficient if their healthcare providers operated under the realm of a free market.
Sounds like you prefer entities with a profit motive to make health care decisions for you. Have you ever known anyone who got sick and their insurance pulled? Or the insurance company denied a necessary surgery because it costs too much?
I'm not in favor of government overegulation. But there are some things the government need to step in.
Have you ever considered that everything has a cost, and that allowing people to be free allows for equilibrium spending for services? It's often times extremely expensive to give somebody a slight extension of their life, and as horrible as it might sound, sometimes it's really not worth it.
There is no magic formula to make everyone happy. If a doctor came up to me and said "Mr bender123, you have ________, and you're going to die in 3 months unless we perform this surgery on you which costs $400,000. And if you do have the surgery, you're probably only gonna live for another 3 years." I'd say it probably isn't worth it. If I had the money, sure I'd pay it. But I wouldn't sit there and cry about how everyone else should be forced to chip in to give me a slight life extension.
Government is already a huge reason why everything costs so much. Shortage of doctors, for example. That's inflating the salary of doctors, and costing everyone money when they want to see one. What's preventing the country from having a steady supply? Regulations. You can't just start practicing medicine, you've got to go through a whole bunch of shit, have enough money to pay for the excess barriers to business, and be approved by a board of existing doctors who have an incentive to keep the supply short. For example, there are a lot of perfectly qualified and experienced doctors who could start practicing, but we don't let them because they can't get residency acceptance due to having been educated in other parts of the world. Fucked up.
You didn't answer my questions. But I'll ask you this additional question. What is your proposed solution then?
I've probably known a person who's lost their insurance after getting sick. I know people who have been dropped from their car insurance after getting in a wreck, too. It's really the same concept.
It costs a lot of money to fix cars and people. If we force insurance companies to cover everyone regardless of any ailments, those costs will be felt by everyone, not just the insurance companies.
Yes, that's the point. The more people you spread the costs over, the cheaper it is for everyone. How much do you think hospitals and doctors pay for collection agencies?
But back to the question. What's your proposed solution?
It is sad that you think money paid for health services is evil if it is paid via taxes instead of through insurance premiums, even if the total amount spent is lower by removing the insurance company profit.
Imagine actually believing that the government can provide services more efficiently than the free market, because "pr0fit!!!111!!"...lol profit is the reason WHY it's more efficient.
The 20 countries that have all done it, disagree with your blind faith in the invisible hand when it comes to health care services.
Just because they've all done it doesn't mean it wouldn't be more efficient if they hadn't.
They all rank above us in efficiency and coverage.
Which proves nothing for 2 reasons:
1) The US has nothing close to a free market health care system. It's heavily influenced by government.
2) The overall efficiency of healthcare is determined by more factors than just government policy. If the efficiency and coverage really is better than the US in any of those countries, it would be even more efficient if their healthcare providers operated under the realm of a free market.
Sounds like you prefer entities with a profit motive to make health care decisions for you. Have you ever known anyone who got sick and their insurance pulled? Or the insurance company denied a necessary surgery because it costs too much?
I'm not in favor of government overegulation. But there are some things the government need to step in.
Have you ever considered that everything has a cost, and that allowing people to be free allows for equilibrium spending for services? It's often times extremely expensive to give somebody a slight extension of their life, and as horrible as it might sound, sometimes it's really not worth it.
There is no magic formula to make everyone happy. If a doctor came up to me and said "Mr bender123, you have ________, and you're going to die in 3 months unless we perform this surgery on you which costs $400,000. And if you do have the surgery, you're probably only gonna live for another 3 years." I'd say it probably isn't worth it. If I had the money, sure I'd pay it. But I wouldn't sit there and cry about how everyone else should be forced to chip in to give me a slight life extension.
Government is already a huge reason why everything costs so much. Shortage of doctors, for example. That's inflating the salary of doctors, and costing everyone money when they want to see one. What's preventing the country from having a steady supply? Regulations. You can't just start practicing medicine, you've got to go through a whole bunch of shit, have enough money to pay for the excess barriers to business, and be approved by a board of existing doctors who have an incentive to keep the supply short. For example, there are a lot of perfectly qualified and experienced doctors who could start practicing, but we don't let them because they can't get residency acceptance due to having been educated in other parts of the world. Fucked up.
You didn't answer my questions. But I'll ask you this additional question. What is your proposed solution then?
I've probably known a person who's lost their insurance after getting sick. I know people who have been dropped from their car insurance after getting in a wreck, too. It's really the same concept.
It costs a lot of money to fix cars and people. If we force insurance companies to cover everyone regardless of any ailments, those costs will be felt by everyone, not just the insurance companies.
Yes, that's the point. The more people you spread the costs over, the cheaper it is for everyone. How much do you think hospitals and doctors pay for collection agencies?
But back to the question. What's your proposed solution?
Yeah its worked great under ObaMao Care! Only a 13% increase in premiums this year.......
This was the plan from the get go. The administration knew they couldn't get a single payer system passed, so they came up with a system that would be sure to fail. Once it fails, single payer will be the only option. Pretty sick if you ask me.
Pretty much every other advanced country has single payer or some kind of similar "evil" socialized medicine
Then go live there and fuck off.
love it or leave it response from the pothead. No surprise.
You do know that healthcare is about 18% of GDP vs. about 8-12 in the other countries and people are charged 400 times as much for pills as in those countries.
Do you think it may be related to the diets and the failure of the FDA to allow giants such as Conagra to provide cheap, instant blood sugar spiking foods to the masses... Just maybe???
Since the FDA has done such a bang up job with the regulation of our food. I'm sure the Federal Government would do even better at further control of health care.
Every Looberal says so.
Fucking this.
This is very true
I wish they would pass legislation that prevents people using food stamps to buy fast food and other junk food. Food stamps should only be used for meat, cheese, milk, water, veggies, bread, etc. The fact that someone can use taxpayer dollars to buy bags of Doritios, 24 pack Mountain Dew, fast food combo meals, etc. is disgusting to me. This country gives these people money to make themselves even more sick, so we have to spend even more money paying for their more expensive medical bills later in life.
I understand that people should have freedom to spend their money. But they didn't earn that money, we gave them that money. And thus, we should be able to control how that money is spent. When they get a job and earn actual wages then they can buy all the crap they want.
Social security obviously doesn't count, because most of that money was earned from years of employment.
This obviously won't pass because every fast food and junk food lobbyist in the country would prevent this from happening.
This was the plan from the get go. The administration knew they couldn't get a single payer system passed, so they came up with a system that would be sure to fail. Once it fails, single payer will be the only option. Pretty sick if you ask me.
Pretty much every other advanced country has single payer or some kind of similar "evil" socialized medicine
Then go live there and fuck off.
love it or leave it response from the pothead. No surprise.
You do know that healthcare is about 18% of GDP vs. about 8-12 in the other countries and people are charged 400 times as much for pills as in those countries.
Do you think it may be related to the diets and the failure of the FDA to allow giants such as Conagra to provide cheap, instant blood sugar spiking foods to the masses... Just maybe???
Since the FDA has done such a bang up job with the regulation of our food. I'm sure the Federal Government would do even better at further control of health care.
Every Looberal says so.
Fucking this.
This is very true
I wish they would pass legislation that prevents people using food stamps to buy fast food and other junk food. Food stamps should only be used for meat, cheese, milk, water, veggies, bread, etc. The fact that someone can use taxpayer dollars to buy bags of Doritios, 24 pack Mountain Dew, fast food combo meals, etc. is disgusting to me. This country gives these people money to make themselves even more sick, so we have to spend even more money paying for their more expensive medical bills later in life.
I understand that people should have freedom to spend their money. But they didn't earn that money, we gave them that money. And thus, we should be able to control how that money is spent. When they get a job and earn actual wages then they can buy all the crap they want.
Social security obviously doesn't count, because most of that money was earned from years of employment.
This obviously won't pass because every fast food and junk food lobbyist in the country would prevent this from happening.
Great! The next thing you'll want is for those poor down trodden folks that are just way too stressed out about having to get up in the morning and groom themselves, is for them to submit to a drug test to keep their benefits.
This was the plan from the get go. The administration knew they couldn't get a single payer system passed, so they came up with a system that would be sure to fail. Once it fails, single payer will be the only option. Pretty sick if you ask me.
Pretty much every other advanced country has single payer or some kind of similar "evil" socialized medicine
Then go live there and fuck off.
love it or leave it response from the pothead. No surprise.
You do know that healthcare is about 18% of GDP vs. about 8-12 in the other countries and people are charged 400 times as much for pills as in those countries.
Do you think it may be related to the diets and the failure of the FDA to allow giants such as Conagra to provide cheap, instant blood sugar spiking foods to the masses... Just maybe???
Since the FDA has done such a bang up job with the regulation of our food. I'm sure the Federal Government would do even better at further control of health care.
Every Looberal says so.
So then, maybe we should do something about corporate lobbying and the round robin between corporations and regulating agencies.
It is fucking hilarious how people want to blame the gov't while ignoring the corporate lobbying that controls the gov't.
Curious how that works. Price controls reduce supply. Who woulda guessed?
Somebody gets it. This is why my doctor friend switched from maxillary work to boobs and noses. Better pay. He was struggling trying to heal people. And is now a hero to many on these boreds.
It is sad that you think money paid for health services is evil if it is paid via taxes instead of through insurance premiums, even if the total amount spent is lower by removing the insurance company profit.
Imagine actually believing that the government can provide services more efficiently than the free market, because "pr0fit!!!111!!"...lol profit is the reason WHY it's more efficient.
The 20 countries that have all done it, disagree with your blind faith in the invisible hand when it comes to health care services.
Just because they've all done it doesn't mean it wouldn't be more efficient if they hadn't.
They all rank above us in efficiency and coverage.
Which proves nothing for 2 reasons:
1) The US has nothing close to a free market health care system. It's heavily influenced by government.
2) The overall efficiency of healthcare is determined by more factors than just government policy. If the efficiency and coverage really is better than the US in any of those countries, it would be even more efficient if their healthcare providers operated under the realm of a free market.
Sounds like you prefer entities with a profit motive to make health care decisions for you. Have you ever known anyone who got sick and their insurance pulled? Or the insurance company denied a necessary surgery because it costs too much?
I'm not in favor of government overegulation. But there are some things the government need to step in.
Have you ever considered that everything has a cost, and that allowing people to be free allows for equilibrium spending for services? It's often times extremely expensive to give somebody a slight extension of their life, and as horrible as it might sound, sometimes it's really not worth it.
There is no magic formula to make everyone happy. If a doctor came up to me and said "Mr bender123, you have ________, and you're going to die in 3 months unless we perform this surgery on you which costs $400,000. And if you do have the surgery, you're probably only gonna live for another 3 years." I'd say it probably isn't worth it. If I had the money, sure I'd pay it. But I wouldn't sit there and cry about how everyone else should be forced to chip in to give me a slight life extension.
Government is already a huge reason why everything costs so much. Shortage of doctors, for example. That's inflating the salary of doctors, and costing everyone money when they want to see one. What's preventing the country from having a steady supply? Regulations. You can't just start practicing medicine, you've got to go through a whole bunch of shit, have enough money to pay for the excess barriers to business, and be approved by a board of existing doctors who have an incentive to keep the supply short. For example, there are a lot of perfectly qualified and experienced doctors who could start practicing, but we don't let them because they can't get residency acceptance due to having been educated in other parts of the world. Fucked up.
You didn't answer my questions. But I'll ask you this additional question. What is your proposed solution then?
I've probably known a person who's lost their insurance after getting sick. I know people who have been dropped from their car insurance after getting in a wreck, too. It's really the same concept.
It costs a lot of money to fix cars and people. If we force insurance companies to cover everyone regardless of any ailments, those costs will be felt by everyone, not just the insurance companies.
Yes, that's the point. The more people you spread the costs over, the cheaper it is for everyone. How much do you think hospitals and doctors pay for collection agencies?
But back to the question. What's your proposed solution?
Fuck you Hondo. You Yahoo/Huffington Post devouring dickheads are a fucking joke. Try doing your own homework you lazy, codependent cunt.
You blabber on endlessly about how great socialism and Hillary are, then get stuck in a corner and cry "Well, what's YOUR solution?" All you want is to be cradled and not have to pull your own weight.
Typical lefty bullshit from a dipshit fucking wimp.
How much do you think hospitals and doctors pay for collection agencies?
But back to the question. What's your proposed solution
Do you really think businesses pay collection agencies more than they help bring in? I'm not sure where you're going with that question.
My proposed solution is to let everyone freely come up with their own solution. Every problem is different so every solution is different. Let everyone's values manifest naturally.
Average premium increases more than halved from 1999-2004 - 2004-2009, but then only dropped by 24% from 2004-2009 - 2009-2014.
When you consider the trend, the numbers in that chart suggest that the ACA has indeed increased the cost of premiums, which in my mind has no doubt happened. I mean, we're covering more people, and we're covering people who are extremely costly to cover...obviously that's going to impact the price of premiums.
Yeah its worked great under ObaMao Care! Only a 13% increase in premiums this year.......
Not sure where you're getting 13% for this year, but premium increases have slowed since Obamacare. They've always grown every year, Obamacare or not.
From my fucking bill is where I get the info! Company says it's due to ObaMao Care costs being higher.
That's settles it then.
Did your company get off the gold standard in 1933, too?
Your insurer probably needed that 13% to cover the costs of your full blown AIDS.
No they said your proctologist bills were so high everyone had to get an increase. Something about the purchase of miners hats and trying to locate 7 monkeys on a moped trying to make a u-turn. I'm sure they had room......
Average premium increases more than halved from 1999-2004 - 2004-2009, but then only dropped by 24% from 2004-2009 - 2009-2014.
When you consider the trend, the numbers in that chart suggest that the ACA has indeed increased the cost of premiums, which in my mind has no doubt happened. I mean, we're covering more people, and we're covering people who are extremely costly to cover...obviously that's going to impact the price of premiums.
Comments
It costs a lot of money to fix cars and people. If we force insurance companies to cover everyone regardless of any ailments, those costs will be felt by everyone, not just the insurance companies.
But back to the question. What's your proposed solution?
This is Merica. We have Freedom damn it!
You blabber on endlessly about how great socialism and Hillary are, then get stuck in a corner and cry "Well, what's YOUR solution?" All you want is to be cradled and not have to pull your own weight.
Typical lefty bullshit from a dipshit fucking wimp.
My proposed solution is to let everyone freely come up with their own solution. Every problem is different so every solution is different. Let everyone's values manifest naturally.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________
. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--==``
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`\
Nothings change here.
When you consider the trend, the numbers in that chart suggest that the ACA has indeed increased the cost of premiums, which in my mind has no doubt happened. I mean, we're covering more people, and we're covering people who are extremely costly to cover...obviously that's going to impact the price of premiums.
Did your company get off the gold standard in 1933, too?
Your insurer probably needed that 13% to cover the costs of your full blown AIDS.