If Medicare for all is such a slick no brainer
Comments
-
Naaaah, I'm having a great time.
-
I’m sure our healthcare outcomes are FAR superior to the countries behind us in this chart. -
SFGbob said:
Yeah, you're too smart for me Flea. That "orange slice" crack was devastating. I don't believe I'll ever be able to recover. Whenever you want to deal in substance you let me know, and I'll hand you your ignorant ass.dflea said:
Let me translate:SFGbob said:I asked the question the other day and of course not a single liberal Kunt responded although Flea did show us all his ass.
According to liberals today medical care is a "right." Can someone please identify any other "rights" that require other people to pay for them?
And why are we going to destroy the entire health insurance industry to provide coverage to the 10% of the people who have no health insurance coverage?
Why can't those 10% do what the rest of us do in order to secure health insurance? Why are we going to tear up the entire system in order to provide coverage for this 10%?
I woke up the other day looking for something to snivel like a little fucking girl about - and I found it!
So I came to HH, where I spend my whole pitiful life arguing politics with Hondo, to cry like a bitch.
'flea clowned me for being the drippy cunt I am after I demanded an explanation from the liberals, so now I'm going to cry about that.
lol
What a goat.
You better give your pal Coug an ass tonguing. He just claimed poor people are covered by Medicaid.
Actually, it was pretty fucking funny. But I guess you would have to lead a miserable and pathetic life on these boreds for the last 15 years to understand his dry humor.
Also, in another thread you finally earned the Donkey-bomb from him. So yore moving up in the world. You have that going for you. Which is nice.
@dflea -
Is that because private individuals are wasting money or because the government is wasting money?Rubberfist said:
I’m sure our healthcare outcomes are FAR superior to the countries behind us in this chart.
I love that all of the socialists like to pretend the US has a purely capitalist system when the argument is about how inefficient the current system is.
Intervene in the market, distort the market, blame the market, call for more intervention, rinse and repeat. -
I agree with you. But if I read that chart right. It shows that through 2007, public expenditures are less than private. No?UW_Doog_Bot said:
Is that because private individuals are wasting money or because the government is wasting money?Rubberfist said:
I’m sure our healthcare outcomes are FAR superior to the countries behind us in this chart.
I love that all of the socialists like to pretend the US has a purely capitalist system when the argument is about how inefficient the current system is.
Intervene in the market, distort the market, blame the market, call for more intervention, rinse and repeat. -
*sigh* The point is that public expenditures are a Yuge part of our system. The fact that they make up around 50% of the market tells you just what a "free" market it is. A pure free market should have 0% public expenditures.2001400ex said:
I agree with you. But if I read that chart right. It shows that through 2007, public expenditures are less than private. No?UW_Doog_Bot said:
Is that because private individuals are wasting money or because the government is wasting money?Rubberfist said:
I’m sure our healthcare outcomes are FAR superior to the countries behind us in this chart.
I love that all of the socialists like to pretend the US has a purely capitalist system when the argument is about how inefficient the current system is.
Intervene in the market, distort the market, blame the market, call for more intervention, rinse and repeat.
C'mon Hondo, it's NOT hard. -
And further, part of why I like to use the historical numbers, is because you can see how sharply spending (both public and private) took off exactly when the government entered the market in 1965. There's also sharp increases with the various passages of each version of medicare.
If your argument is that our current system is inefficient, there is strong correlated evidence that government spending, and the crowding out it causes the private sector, is what is driving those inefficiencies. Keep blaming the private sector for the increasing failings of an increasingly socialist system. It's the socialist playbook. -
Well then what you are saying is, half the market is already government ran, is not a big stretch to make the entire system government ran.UW_Doog_Bot said:
*sigh* The point is that public expenditures are a Yuge part of our system. The fact that they make up around 50% of the market tells you just what a "free" market it is. A pure free market should have 0% public expenditures.2001400ex said:
I agree with you. But if I read that chart right. It shows that through 2007, public expenditures are less than private. No?UW_Doog_Bot said:
Is that because private individuals are wasting money or because the government is wasting money?Rubberfist said:
I’m sure our healthcare outcomes are FAR superior to the countries behind us in this chart.
I love that all of the socialists like to pretend the US has a purely capitalist system when the argument is about how inefficient the current system is.
Intervene in the market, distort the market, blame the market, call for more intervention, rinse and repeat.
C'mon Hondo, it's NOT hard. -
UW_Doog_Bot said:
And further, part of why I like to use the historical numbers, is because you can see how sharply spending (both public and private) took off exactly when the government entered the market in 1965. There's also sharp increases with the various passages of each version of medicare.
If your argument is that our current system is inefficient, there is strong correlated evidence that government spending, and the crowding out it causes the private sector, is what is driving those inefficiencies. Keep blaming the private sector for the increasing failings of an increasingly socialist system. It's the socialist playbook.
I'd like to see the chart through 2017.
I'd also like to see GDP through 2017 as well. -
komo4buttfucker, it's not hard. I believe government spending exceeded private in the last few years but I could be wrong.2001400ex said:UW_Doog_Bot said:And further, part of why I like to use the historical numbers, is because you can see how sharply spending (both public and private) took off exactly when the government entered the market in 1965. There's also sharp increases with the various passages of each version of medicare.
If your argument is that our current system is inefficient, there is strong correlated evidence that government spending, and the crowding out it causes the private sector, is what is driving those inefficiencies. Keep blaming the private sector for the increasing failings of an increasingly socialist system. It's the socialist playbook.
I'd like to see the chart through 2017.
I'd also like to see GDP through 2017 as well.
