Government run healthcare... a Greek tragedy.

So even when a question is asked with civility, you refuse to answer...just as I thought.


Gee...all you had to do was post the link to the page your "interpretation" came from.


...but you couldn't even do that one simple thing for someone on the other side of the political aisle...understood.


And for good measure, my civility is met with another fat joke...more "Christian" kindness in all it's glory!

The only time civility could ever be attributed to you, is when you keep your mouth shut.

Your past behavior speaks more of your intent, then your typed comments ever could.
 
The only time civility could ever be attributed to you, is when you keep your mouth shut.

Your past behavior speaks more of your intent, then your typed comments ever could.


Oh that's too bad...again we see that even when asked politely, someone as hateful as USF just will not provide a simple link to the "interpretation" he just posted.

Even though he expects his every request for a link or a cite to be answered.


:good4u:
 
Oh that's too bad...again we see that even when asked politely, someone as hateful as USF just will not provide a simple link to the "interpretation" he just posted.

Even though he expects his every request for a link or a cite to be answered.


:good4u:

Now that you're finally posted something you can be held accoutable for, would you care to support your assertion regarding me expecting my every request for a link or a cite to be answered?
I'll even settle for something showing the last time that I requested a link or a cite.

Go ahead and just admit that you really don't care what is posted, you just want to complain about who it is posting it; because if you didn't agree with my post, you could have replied with something that refutes it.
 
I challenge you to PROVE it. The only bullshit is your bluster.

Bfgrn said:
The 'for profit' private insurance we have now is not based on sound economic theory

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatc...anies-likely-to-break-profit-records-for-2010

The six largest investor-owned health insurance companies saw a 22 percent increase in combined net income in the third quarter, putting them on pace to break profit records for 2010.

According to S.E.C. figures compiled by Health Care for America Now (HCAN), which lobbied Congress to pass March's healthcare overhaul, the top six insurers made a total of $3.4 billion in profits during Q3, or $611 million more than they did during the same period last year.


there, proven. your theory and premise is pure unadulterated bullshit.
 
What would you say if the UN decided that since Canada promotes it's health care as being so great, that anyone in the world can use it; but only the Canadians have to pay for it?

In what way is this relevant? Even if it were relevant WTF are you talking about?
 
The way that ObamaCare went about it, was oppressive and that does seem to be what the argument is really about.
No one has said that Health Care can't be improved; but the objection is forcing everyone to pay into something, just because the Government says they should.

So you are oppressed by RomneyCare right now? How are you enduring this oppression? It must be very stressful.

Never mind the fact that as a "conservative", why are you not concerned by the money being wasted in our present system?
The reason is that you are so brainwashed that it is more important to you that the one percent get their pound of flesh from as many people as possible than that the country spend a more reasonable portion of it's wealth on healthcare for all.
 
Isn't the whole point of the healthcare reforms to regulate the industry and remove the wholly profits driven system in place now.
not the one they've created here in the states. based on the way the legislation is written, it's to maximize the profit potential of the health insurance industry so that it can provide more coverage to people who seemingly can't afford coverage. in other words, it's to greatly expand and increase the risk pool to cover others.
 
not the one they've created here in the states. based on the way the legislation is written, it's to maximize the profit potential of the health insurance industry so that it can provide more coverage to people who seemingly can't afford coverage. in other words, it's to greatly expand and increase the risk pool to cover others.

Seemingly? Are you actualy retarded?
 
I agree with dumberthanmany; and I'm not high.
Forcing 20 something healthy kids to buy thier products is going to be very profitable.
 
Try to put seemingly in laymans terms for me then, simpleton.

Are you actualy saying you think everyone can afford health insurance?

use apple as your example. he can afford his own coverage, but human nature being what it is, gives him incentive to let the taxpayers pay his coverage, as if he couldn't afford it. seemingly.
 
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatc...anies-likely-to-break-profit-records-for-2010

The six largest investor-owned health insurance companies saw a 22 percent increase in combined net income in the third quarter, putting them on pace to break profit records for 2010.

According to S.E.C. figures compiled by Health Care for America Now (HCAN), which lobbied Congress to pass March's healthcare overhaul, the top six insurers made a total of $3.4 billion in profits during Q3, or $611 million more than they did during the same period last year.


there, proven. your theory and premise is pure unadulterated bullshit.

I'm sorry. I thought I was talking to an adult. You just want to read one sentence and create your own context without understanding the context of what I said. The fucking profit has NOTHING to do with better care for patients, which is the stakes the patient has in the transaction. It is a model that only benefits the insurance cartels...THAT is not sound economics, it is a travesty.

HERE is what I said. Read past the first sentence this time.

"Of course it could work here, because it is based on sound economic theory. The 'for profit' private insurance we have now is not based on sound economic theory. Anyone with a hint of understanding of a market transaction can see that the patient does not have leverage in the transaction. The incentive for the patient is to get the best care. The incentive for the insurance provider is to find a way to deny care to increase profit.

And insurance corporations know they can't compete with a government plan. The Medicare program that we have is a government-run program that has administrative expenses around three percent. Private insurance corporations administrative expense is around 20-30%."
 
use apple as your example. he can afford his own coverage, but human nature being what it is, gives him incentive to let the taxpayers pay his coverage, as if he couldn't afford it. seemingly.

Human nature being what it is? The discussion is about those who can't afford health care. WTF does a financialy comfortable canadien have to do with it?
 
Back
Top