apple0154
MEOW
Touché
APP - Harkin says bribes are just "small stuff"
- Thread starter tinfoil
- Start date
Touché
THIS!
No kidding. How can you deal with minds like this? It's not worth the effort.
Good Luck
New member
And dozens of countries have their problems with it. You act as if every country with a universal plan has zero problems with their health care systems. Do you honestly believe that? Rocket science is easy compared to this kind of problem, because the laws of physics do not have to account for the vagaries of human behavior.
WHOSE reasoning abilities are limited? "If it could be improved, it would have been?" Are you SERIOUSLY implying all universal plans are perfect, without any types of problems?
Seriously, dude, what the HELL are you smoking?
apple0154
MEOW
Yes, other countries have problems. I have always maintained a universal health plan needs to be fine-tuned to individual countries, however, we can get the people covered while we fine tune.
Most countries with universal plans make adjustments. It's necessary as new procedures come on line and the population ages and changes.
Again, no. What I was referring to is one has to have a basic plan to start with, otherwise, there is no incentive to work on anything. People who do not want a universal plan are not going to come up with ideas to implement one, let alone a good one. We've witnessed that for generations.
As Obama stated the time for talk is over. Can anyone keep a straight face and say the people were not patient? Every industrialized country has implemented a universal plan. Even countries not so industrialized.
Talking about smoking it appears that's been the problem.
Just vege out and worry about medical another day or another year or another decade. Anyone interested in a universal plan knows the wait has been outrageously long. Of course, those opposed to any universal plan want more talks, more committees, more investigations, more proof, more delay.
Absolutely insane, you cripple your own thought by never taking anything except what is given by your own party, who "negotiated" away everything you thought was good about the bill. Many options were offered, none were even considered if it didn't first give more centralization to the Federal government. Zero.
We (the US) cripple ourselves by simply not looking in any other direction than the one that we've chosen before the negotiations ever started. This isn't a party thing, it happens all the time regardless of party. However, we have a chance to make something unique and far better than what has come before.
Instead we have something that is worse than what is currently in place.
The Senate bill allows the insurance companies to cap payment for large diseases like cancer. Health bankruptcies can and will continue, the only difference... the government will force them into inadequate coverage. The extremely high deductible in the House's bill will continue the pattern of those who cannot afford coverage, they still won't be able to afford it. Again, the choice will be to bankrupt the family, or to go without treatment.
Nothing is good about either of these bills, it pretty much gives me pause as to the actual motive for passing this rubbish. It becomes clear that they wanted anything, literally anything because they think they can "fix" it with predetermined "solutions" that are simply more mediocre copies of the European systems that we can improve rather than settle for.
That you give up so easily doesn't mean that the constituency who say, "Don't pass this we can improve upon it by a long shot!" have. Thank the little gods that the nation doesn't have the same victimization syndrome you expect them to and they also have a far larger expectation of their representatives. I'd hate it if most of the nation had the same weak ho-hum attitude that had you writing, "They're the Senators, we shouldn't question them"... That is just beyond gross. They are the people we hired to do a job, if they don't pay attention we will remove them and the "fix" isn't going to look anything at all like what you wanted.
The total surrender you display to the "leadership" actually creates a bit of bile in my throat. I expect better of the people I vote for, not stupid legislation that makes matters worse that they expect to be able to "fix" later. The majority of people aren't on your side, thank the little gods again for that, it shows again that the constituencies aren't as willing to surrender as you are.
Whether it is because some don't think it goes far enough, or they don't want this to be another entitlement program, or they believe it is unconstitutional, all of the constituencies say that we CAN and SHOULD do better than THIS.
One thing I know, attempting to force this down the throat of an unwilling constituency will only insure that the people who get to "fix" this inadequate rubbish will start more from my side of the argument. For that I am thankful, I think it is a shame that even 43% of the nation are so willing to surrender to inadequate mediocrity rather than expect something worthy of the ingenuity we can display when we are driven. And when the other party is applying those "fixes" you thought your party would apply... I sure hope you have that same insane attitude that they are the Senators, so they must know better than you....
Good Luck
New member
Maybe when a workable plan comes along, instead of something copied from a problem laden plan for a much smaller country, or a plan designed to increase the size, economic power and political power of the major insurance carriers, then more people would be onb board. "Time for action" does not mean anything is better than nothing. The proponents, for all their spouting of negative statistics, fail to recognize one stat that harms their seat right out of the chute. Despite how "broken" the U.S. health care system is, it somehow manages to keep 85% of the people covered, and 80% of those satisfied with their coverage. That puts 68% of the people personally neutral to the issue and if it looks like your plan threatens what they are satisfied with, they come out against it.
That is why previous attempts have failed, too. Because the people recognize when a plan is not going to work better than the system - faulty as it is - that is already in place. Find a REAL fix, and you'll have the people behind you. Keep with the usual big government knows best bullshit, and you'll continue to face an hard uphill, shove-it-down-the-people's-throats battle.
If you want to actually fix what is broken, then better answer is two fold. First, focus on the broken part rather than the whole. You don't rebuild a car's engine just because the tranny went out. You fix the tranny.
And second, go after WHY it is broken. And the reason for the entire problem from those not covered on the low end to higher premiums and compromised coverage in the middle part is rising health care costs at an unexplained rate. Use of higher technologies in diagnosis and treatment is often referred to as an excuse, but it does not hold water. Every other industry in the world uses higher technologies, and it results in diminished costs, not higher ones.
Find why health care costs have gone through the roof, find a way to control those factors, and then the problem is actually fixed instead of placing the usual government fix band aid over it.
Such an approach will also help other countries whose "1/2 the U.S." budgets aren't quite enough to do what is claimed they are doing.
That is why previous attempts have failed, too. Because the people recognize when a plan is not going to work better than the system - faulty as it is - that is already in place. Find a REAL fix, and you'll have the people behind you. Keep with the usual big government knows best bullshit, and you'll continue to face an hard uphill, shove-it-down-the-people's-throats battle.
If you want to actually fix what is broken, then better answer is two fold. First, focus on the broken part rather than the whole. You don't rebuild a car's engine just because the tranny went out. You fix the tranny.
And second, go after WHY it is broken. And the reason for the entire problem from those not covered on the low end to higher premiums and compromised coverage in the middle part is rising health care costs at an unexplained rate. Use of higher technologies in diagnosis and treatment is often referred to as an excuse, but it does not hold water. Every other industry in the world uses higher technologies, and it results in diminished costs, not higher ones.
Find why health care costs have gone through the roof, find a way to control those factors, and then the problem is actually fixed instead of placing the usual government fix band aid over it.
Such an approach will also help other countries whose "1/2 the U.S." budgets aren't quite enough to do what is claimed they are doing.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
first, you pay me taxes then I will write you a check......
Litmus
Verified User
It's often the case that turbo libs of apple's density have their intelligence inversely proportional to their haughtiness.
Why would you need that? Since you are the government you take in far less than you spend. Just write the check, nobody would notice.
apple0154
MEOW
That's because the insurance guy and hospital gal and all the other independent, non-government people either don't give a damn or are unaware of how to solve the problem. That is the reason. Do you know anyone who would pay for your hospitalization if you were unable to afford it? The insurance guy and the hospital gal and your neighbor will all go on about how the system needs fixing and then return to their own lives and that's it. That's been going on for generations. Talk. Talk. Talk.
The government has a chance to make it better. Not the private citizen.
Does anyone read history? After the old people were dying from starvation or homelessness the government implemented SS. No, it's not nirvana. Not many steaks for dinner and less tempur-pedic beds (yes, they are comfortable) but it was better than before. I'm sure there were well-meaning folks around then who had all sorts of ideas but the elderly just kept dying until the government did something.
The so-called mediocre European systems are cherished by the citizens.
It's get really old when people bad-mouth things they know little about.
Of course they do. They have been saying how things should be better for the last fifty years! Nothing has changed, yet.
When the plan takes effect and adjustments are made it will be a completely different story just like it is in the dozens of countries that have universal plans.
We know, the proof is apparent, that countries which have universal plans fight to keep them. Not one politician in any country is campaigning on dismantling their universal plan.
But you know differently. They're all wrong. Politicians who have visited other countries or studied universal plans in effect have no idea what they're talking about. The citizens are brainwashed and the fact their longevity is equal to or greater than the average US citizen is probably due to their "Who me? Worry?" attitude.
To paraphrase Obama it's time for change. No more worn out ideas. We can't wait any longer. The time is now.
Did you have a good Christmas? Global warming has been kind to us. The third consecutive day above freezing. Love it! May I live long enough to see a palm tree in my yard.
apple0154
MEOW
Don't take my haughtiness personally, my comically looking friend.
I suppose I do lose patience with those who refuse to learn or research. I will attempt an adjustment of attitude.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
they haven't given me the keys to the Treasury yet....
Total rubbish. They don't become something other than human because they work someplace. That's just your own imaginary bogeyman.
The government has the ability to promote the solution through the means of the private citizen, it is necessary to think a little outside your box if you want to create something that will lead the rest of the world, thankfully our forefathers did and up until now we have been able to maintain that capacity as a society. Society must not follow if they plan on leading, they must not copy if they are to create.
The government is rarely the source for anything good, it is why we chose to limit its power in the US specifically outlining places where it shall not go.
We fully comprehend this, however there are other consequences of the action of the government at that time. Nobody here has argued that we take old people off of SS except that same imaginary bogeyman you continue to argue.
Rubbish, they are being altered to systems more like the US system not because they are "cherished" but because they are often failing and are mediocre.
Like you and what anybody writes here? You simply ignore it and go on arguing with the bogeyman in your brain rather than what people say.
LOL. First it must take effect, then people must realize how crappy it is (it is spectacularly crappy, specifically designed to fail in an attempt to blame "free markets") before it will ever be changed by those that "created" it. Thankfully the fact that people will be paying into a system that hasn't even taken effect yet will cause a bit of a "stir" and the other party will very likely be the party that will "fix" the mess your party created.
Nobody is "fighting to keep them" that is imagination again. Where are the people taking to the streets to "keep" their mediocre system? The reality is as they become more like the US system people are relieved that their system will be able to continue a few more years. The only place we see and hear people taking to the streets to keep their current system is here.
No politician traveled and "studied" these plans,. Which one of them has taken a trip to Europe and spent years studying the impact of the health care programs? Zero. Not even one. In the Senate there may be one or two that have spent even as much time as I have in Europe let alone studied these things. They are simply citizens like you and I who are elected to represent us, they do not become more knowledgeable than any other person who pays attention simply by getting elected, and many remain in total ignorance as they promote an agenda based in that same ignorance.
To paraphrase Obama, "These meetings will be held on CSPAN so that the citizen can see what deals are made".
The time is now to demand that the elected actually do what they say they would. That is the change that we need right now.
Did you have a good Christmas? Global warming has been kind to us. The third consecutive day above freezing. Love it! May I live long enough to see a palm tree in my yard.
Litmus
Verified User
Don't take my haughtiness personally, my comically looking friend.
I suppose I do lose patience with those who refuse to learn or research. I will attempt an adjustment of attitude.
I would imagine you tire of your own stupidity.
apple0154
MEOW
Only of yours, I'm sorry to say.
Good Luck
New member
You are a great one for talking about people refusing to learn. Do you have a single idea that doesn't come straight from the DNC?
And while we're speaking of refusing to do any research, have you looked up the health care situation abroad and in the U.S. prior to most of Europe going to universal plans? If so, how do you explain that the amounts the U.S. spends per capita in ratio with others did not change significantly when they went to their universal plans? We spent twice as much before universal plans became common, we spend twice as much now. So much for the conclusion that the reason they spend half as much is that universal plans are less expensive.
But, of course, you did not look at the data available, did you? It hasn't been stamped for approval by your political masters.
apple0154
MEOW
That's the point. Those folks aren't anything other than individual folks who can't or don't know how to fix the system on their own. That's why government is needed.
Create away but let's cover the people until we see the creation. What can possibly be wrong with that approach?
Let's not twist things now. I never said or implied anyone was talking about taking people off SS. I said that at the time SS was being discussed I'm sure there were people, just like there are today, who believed government shouldn't get involved. I'm sure there were well-meaning folks who didn't want to see the elderly dying from starvation and homelessness but it was the government which finally addressed the problem.
Nobody wants to see people without proper medical care, however, generations have been talking about it and nothing was done. It was left up to the individual to create something special, to think outside the box. Unfortunately, all we're left with is an empty box.
Rubbish. It is certain people who feel they're entitled to special services and because they have a bit of money are demanding special services. I have no problem with that. If someone has 50 grand lying around and wants to spend it on medical services, be my guest as long as they don't start thinking they're too important to contribute to the universal plan.
Every country that has a universal plan started out with the same system as is in place in the US. They know the bogeyman quite well. That's why they now have a universal plan.
And what fixing has that other party ever done? As I said before we're out of the gate. Now the issue has to be addressed regardless of which party is in power. The "we'll think about it" era has passed. Things will be happening and in order to change that concrete ideas will be required. At the very least the health bill will force the politicians/government to DO, not just talk.
(Shakes head.) Why do you think certain parties in Canada had to go to court to open paying clinics/practices? The majority of the population does not want the universal system eroded. They do not want doctors playing both sides of the field.
If you don't think Canadians value their system then you haven't done your homework. They've made it abundantly clear to all political parties not to mess with the current system. Fine tune, yes. Any attempt at major alterations and the party in power is history.
Again, show me one country with a universal plan that has a politician campaigning on dismantling or radically changing it. If universal plans were so bad there would be a rush of politicians jumping on the wagon. Alas, such is not the case.
All they have to do is pick up a newspaper. Do they ever see a politician campaigning against a universal medical plan? Do they ever see people clamoring for a return to a "pay or suffer" system? If not, why not?
Again, this is not rocket science. While the people may not be celebrating they know damn well it's better than any other system.
apple0154
MEOW
I requested a link before.
One more time, do you have a link to a graph or some other reference regarding medical expenses prior to universal plans?
Also, I think you've overlooked a point. You wrote, "...how do you explain that the amounts the U.S. spends per capita in ratio with others did not change significantly when they went to their universal plans?" which is another way of asking, "How do you explain the medical costs for the countries which did switch to universal plans did not change significantly?" even though they now cover everyone.
Taking your data at face value you've shown countries can implement a universal plan and maintain fiscal control over a long period of time.
Thank-you.
Good Luck
New member
Sorry, but I am kinda old fashioned - I read books for the most part.
But here is a good read: "The Economics of Public Spending" by Gareth D. Myles and Ian Preston
and another: "Economics of Health and Public Policy" by Rita Ricardo-Campbell
And while I am at it, a nice little table in "The Economics of Public Spending" shows health care spending as a percentage of GDP, instead of gross dollars per capita. And guess what? When shown in terms of GDP, the health care costs of other countries started rising more sharply than the U.S. after they started implementing universal care. For instance, in 1910, both France and the U.S. were below 1% GDP in health care expenditures, with France having a slight edge. From 1910 to 1945 the graphs run almost exactly parallel with a slight rise to about 1.5% GDP. Then in 1945, the time that most economists agree France switched over to what is essentially their current plan (tho there have been several modifications since) is, coincidentally, when France's health care expenditures start to rise significantly faster than the U.S.
By 1960 France's health care expenditures had risen to almost 4% GDP while the U.S. barely topped 2%. At this time, again coincidentally at the same time France pushed through a significant expansion of their system, France's expenditures take another upward swing. And, lo, a few years later, at the same time the U.S. implemented Medicare/medicaid, U.S. expenditures also take a significant upward swing. By the year 1990, France's expenditures start to level off but continue to rise until they were spending approximately 6% of their GDP on healthcare in 2000. Likewise U.S. expenditures continue to rise, but were still below 5% GDP as of 2000, when the graph ends.
The figures for Germany are quite similar, except their upward swings occur at different dates coinciding with their implementation and modifications. Ditto Britain, ditto Japan.
So, according to this graphical comparison (with supporting data tables) it would seem to me that implementation of universal care and or public option care is a significant factor in rising health care expenditures.
Now, tell us, what do YOU get out of that kind of data? I would dearly love to hear how you spin it.
Good Luck
New member
Anyway, that's neither here nor there. The topic of this thread is the corrupt manner in which the democrats pushed their piece of shit through the Senate using outright bribery. I wouldn't be surprised if there were not a few private communications adding a threat or two in the process either.
If this legislation is such a good thing, WHY can it not stand on its own merits? These are supposedly intelligent people elected to congress, so you cannot blame it on "conservative lies" like you have been doing. After all, you keep stating that because intelligent people in the private sector have not come up with a solution (that is acceptable to you) then government must step in - implying the men of government are somehow automatically wiser than all us non-government peons.
So why did it not pass easily? Why the skulduggery? Why the riders granting special treatment for states with recalcitrant democratic senators that violate the equality clause of the Constitution that states quite clearly "all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States"?
If this legislation is such a good thing, WHY can it not stand on its own merits? These are supposedly intelligent people elected to congress, so you cannot blame it on "conservative lies" like you have been doing. After all, you keep stating that because intelligent people in the private sector have not come up with a solution (that is acceptable to you) then government must step in - implying the men of government are somehow automatically wiser than all us non-government peons.
So why did it not pass easily? Why the skulduggery? Why the riders granting special treatment for states with recalcitrant democratic senators that violate the equality clause of the Constitution that states quite clearly "all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States"?