Thanks Obamacare


Those that claim they care so much for others without coverage shouldn't have a problem proving it by paying for others with their own money. We both know they won't because it would involve them actually doing themselves what they SAY they support. Lefties step back to the typical it's part of living in society view whenit involves them doing what they say should be done. I've yet to meet one that doesn't automatically support government mandates when it comes to them showing how much they care. Then, you have people like Zappa who call the EARNER of something greedy because they want to keep more of what THEY earned yet has no problem with a non-earner being handed something funded by the earner.
 
You are correct in that we subsidize medicines for the rest of the world. Not sure how you think imposing price controls here will be the answer unless of course you are completely satisfied with the current medications and don't wish for new developments .

Wait, I forgot. The government will "invest" in drug development like they do alternative energy because that is working out so well.

Its called forcing the issue. We put that up other countries are forced to realize that we pay a heavy subsidy for their drugs. Then everyone can agree on a way we can still fund drugs without americans getting screwed.

realpolitik and all that.
 
Its called forcing the issue. We put that up other countries are forced to realize that we pay a heavy subsidy for their drugs. Then everyone can agree on a way we can still fund drugs without americans getting screwed.

realpolitik and all that.

Who is this "we"?
 
Those that claim they care so much for others without coverage shouldn't have a problem proving it by paying for others with their own money. We both know they won't because it would involve them actually doing themselves what they SAY they support. Lefties step back to the typical it's part of living in society view whenit involves them doing what they say should be done. I've yet to meet one that doesn't automatically support government mandates when it comes to them showing how much they care. Then, you have people like Zappa who call the EARNER of something greedy because they want to keep more of what THEY earned yet has no problem with a non-earner being handed something funded by the earner.

Liberalism really is a sick ideology when you break it down. It is filled with contradictions and hypocrisies.

As far as I am concerned there is nothing more greedy than using the force of government to confiscate another citizens property merely to satisfy your own conscience.
 
Liberalism really is a sick ideology when you break it down. It is filled with contradictions and hypocrisies.

As far as I am concerned there is nothing more greedy than using the force of government to confiscate another citizens property merely to satisfy your own conscience.

They don't want those that earned something to keep it but don't mind those that didn't earn it getting it at the expense of those that did. Unlike Zappa thinks, there is absolutely no way I can be greedy by wanting to keep what I'VE earned. It simply isn't possible. The only way he can have that belief is to think that he should be able to dictate how someone else that earned it should use it. I don't know, despite his obvious stupidity, if he's that stupid.
 
They don't want those that earned something to keep it but don't mind those that didn't earn it getting it at the expense of those that did. Unlike Zappa thinks, there is absolutely no way I can be greedy by wanting to keep what I'VE earned. It simply isn't possible. The only way he can have that belief is to think that he should be able to dictate how someone else that earned it should use it. I don't know, despite his obvious stupidity, if he's that stupid.

The reality is that liberalism is and always has been an assault on the middle class.

What is frustrating is that the GOP has ceded so much to the left in the name of compromise.

That Trump is doing what he is doing is a commentary on how the elites have fucked over this country and ordinary Americans are trying to take it back. I think they are doing it through a flawed vessel but I understand it
 
What do you propose be done by the we in order to do what you say should be done with drugs?

The basic thing we should aim for is for the US to stop subsidizing the world. The only reason that the other countries can afford Universal Healthcare is we subsidize their research costs. We have to put america first.

Ideally one of these two things could happen 1) we put up price controls 2) the rest of the world removes theirs.

Number 1 is easier but limits future medicinal research. Number 2 is almost impossible because we would have to beg the other countries to do that.

I propose number 1 so that we can bring the issue to the limelight, much like a parent cutting off the credit card of a child, and get a good solution that will not have the US subsidizing the rest of the world.
 
The basic thing we should aim for is for the US to stop subsidizing the world. The only reason that the other countries can afford Universal Healthcare is we subsidize their research costs. We have to put america first.

Ideally one of these two things could happen 1) we put up price controls 2) the rest of the world removes theirs.

Number 1 is easier but limits future medicinal research. Number 2 is almost impossible because we would have to beg the other countries to do that.

I propose number 1 so that we can bring the issue to the limelight, much like a parent cutting off the credit card of a child, and get a good solution that will not have the US subsidizing the rest of the world.

Sorry but your solution would be horrendous and would not fix the problem.

The fix is simple. Allow the free market to fix it stateside.

If people paid CASH for their prescriptions, it wouldn't take long for the pharmacy companies to figure out how to deal with it.

You are right that we have been subsidizing the rest of the world for years in many ways.

If you allowed the fee market to work and rein in the FDA costs and prices would come down.

The free market is like abstinence. It works every time it is tried
 
Sorry but your solution would be horrendous and would not fix the problem.

The fix is simple. Allow the free market to fix it stateside.

If people paid CASH for their prescriptions, it wouldn't take long for the pharmacy companies to figure out how to deal with it.

You are right that we have been subsidizing the rest of the world for years in many ways.

If you allowed the fee market to work and rein in the FDA costs and prices would come down.

The free market is like abstinence. It works every time it is tried

with their credit card and student card debt taking a lot of income i dont think people have cash to pay for anything.

Are you advocating removing insurance all together?
 
with their credit card and student card debt taking a lot of income i dont think people have cash to pay for anything.

Are you advocating removing insurance all together?

No. I advocate making insurance what it should be and is protection against improbable events.

You can't insure chronic care. It is financially impossible. And it isn't insurance.
 
The reality is that liberalism is and always has been an assault on the middle class.

What is frustrating is that the GOP has ceded so much to the left in the name of compromise.

That Trump is doing what he is doing is a commentary on how the elites have fucked over this country and ordinary Americans are trying to take it back. I think they are doing it through a flawed vessel but I understand it

A compromise is nothing more than both sides agreeing to something that neither side really wants.
 
The basic thing we should aim for is for the US to stop subsidizing the world. The only reason that the other countries can afford Universal Healthcare is we subsidize their research costs. We have to put america first.

Ideally one of these two things could happen 1) we put up price controls 2) the rest of the world removes theirs.

Number 1 is easier but limits future medicinal research. Number 2 is almost impossible because we would have to beg the other countries to do that.

I propose number 1 so that we can bring the issue to the limelight, much like a parent cutting off the credit card of a child, and get a good solution that will not have the US subsidizing the rest of the world.


I say let those other countries do for themselves. You and I both know that the financial subsidies have little to do with economics and mostly with politics.

You lost me at price controls. Too much government. While the U.S. can, although shouldn't, put price controls within the U.S., good luck with other countries.
 
with their credit card and student card debt taking a lot of income i dont think people have cash to pay for anything.

Are you advocating removing insurance all together?

Speak for yourself. I came out of all three degrees not having a dime in debt. My daughters, due to their academic achievements, and my investment in them, will come out of college without any debt.
 
No. I advocate making insurance what it should be and is protection against improbable events.

You can't insure chronic care. It is financially impossible. And it isn't insurance.

It used to be that way. It was called major medical and it covered major medical and catastrophic issues. It didn't cover people every time their nose ran running to the doctor or ER to be seen.
 
Really?

The bull market celebrates its seventh birthday today. Here's the real accomplishment, though: putting $16 trillion into the pockets of investors.

Investors with the guts to ride this bull market since it first emerged on March 9, 2009 have seen the value of stocks rise $16 trillion, according to market research firm Wilshire Associates. Just to put that into perspective, that's nearly equal to the U.S. gross domestic product of $17 trillion.



http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2016/03/09/7-year-bull-makes-investors-16t-richer/81515958/


The highest rate for a single month is shared by November and December of 1982 with an unemployment rate of 10.8%. The year with the highest average unemployment rate was 1982 with an average unemployment rate of 9.71%

http://www.davemanuel.com/historical-unemployment-rates-in-the-united-states.php

So wall street & people with money in wall street love him?
 
Back
Top