Page 1 of 10 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 230

Thread: Obamacare will hurt military families, not just gun owners

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post




    Obamacare will hurt military families
    examiner.com — More Americans need to realize how Obamacare will hurt them, particularly military families who's breadwinner earned their health care insurance by serving in the armed forces. President Obama seeks to give out these same benifits to those who have not earned them, and force military families and others who played by the rules by buying insurance

    CLICK and DIGG at http://www.examiner.com/x-2782-DC-Gu...itary-families

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    National City, CA, ,
    Posts
    239

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:



    Obamacare will hurt military families
    examiner.com — More Americans need to realize how Obamacare will hurt them, particularly military families who's breadwinner earned their health care insurance by serving in the armed forces. President Obama seeks to give out these same benifits to those who have not earned them, and force military families and others who played by the rules by buying insurance

    CLICK and DIGG at http://www.examiner.com/x-2782-DC-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m7d23-Obamacare-will-hurt-military-families
    If this is true, I have a simple solution. Drop my insurance payment. I am sure after I do that, Obama will take care of me and my family.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    I've heard that this Obamacare plan won't be covering treatments for demensia in older citezens.

    I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't cover cancer treatments for patients who have less than a 50% chance of survival, or treatmets for people with progressive degenerative, terminal deseases.

  4. #4
    Regular Member AaronS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,497

    Post imported post

    Task Force 16 wrote:
    I've heard that this Obamacare plan won't be covering treatments for demensia in older citezens.

    I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't cover cancer treatments for patients who have less than a 50% chance of survival, or treatmets for people with progressive degenerative, terminal deseases.
    With that in mind, I wouldwant to knowwhat the lifetime payout cut off is?

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    AaronS wrote:
    Task Force 16 wrote:
    I've heard that this Obamacare plan won't be covering treatments for demensia in older citezens.

    I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't cover cancer treatments for patients who have less than a 50% chance of survival, or treatmets for people with progressive degenerative, terminal deseases.
    With that in mind, I wouldwant to knowwhat the lifetime payout cut off is?
    Well, in order for this plan to have any resemblence of "Cost effectivness" I suspect youwillbe cut off the day you become unable to generate an income that the King can tax. The retired or permantly disabled will no longer be of value to His Majesty, and therefore be allowed to expire of natural causes, without treatment.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    Please provide a citation, break-down, explanation, or other proof for this statement:




    And all you responsible people who have paid for insurance all your lives? Under Obamacare, you will have to pay higher premiums to cover for all those slackers who never did and now get to come into your plan even though they have pre-existing conditions which you now have to pay for with current premiums.


    People that can't afford insurance are ALREADY being paid for under Medicare/Medicaid every time they go to the emergency room with a sniffle, and are being paid forat inflated, open market premiums.

    The purpose of the plan in to bring down the cost of health insurance across the board by putting an end to the raping of people and doctorsby the private insurance companies.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    AWDstylez wrote:
    Please provide a citation, break-down, explanation, or other proof for this statement:




    And all you responsible people who have paid for insurance all your lives? Under Obamacare, you will have to pay higher premiums to cover for all those slackers who never did and now get to come into your plan even though they have pre-existing conditions which you now have to pay for with current premiums.


    People that can't afford insurance are ALREADY being paid for under Medicare/Medicaid every time they go to the emergency room with a sniffle, and are being paid forat inflated, open market premiums.

    The purpose of the plan in to bring down the cost of health insurance across the board by putting an end to the raping of people and doctorsby the private insurance companies.
    The purpose of this "plan" (which Obama claims he doesn't even know what's in it) is NOT lowering costs or ensuring access or ANYTHING LIKE IT. The purpose of "this plan" is CONTROL OF YOUR INDIVIDUAL LIFE. The core of all three bills currently being considered is an "individual mandate" to buy health insurance or else incur a hefty fine.F%^K THAT.

    You can tell me I must buy a certain amount of insurance to operate an automobile. That's fine, because driving is a privelege, not a right. And the insurance is NOT to protect ME; it is to protect others FROM ME if I drive like a blow-hole. AND let us not forget that auto insurance is a STATE mandate, not a FEDERAL mandate. This "individual Mandate" from the Federal Government is an unconstitutional infringement on individual privacy just as much and sez me quite a bit more than the antiabortion laws struck down by "Roe v Wade".

    Here is the centerpiece of "the plan": Come tax-time your 1040, 1040A or 1040EZ will have an additional space that says something like: "Furnish the name of your Health Care Insurance or Management Provider and certify that the coverage therein is at least (insert requirements here) OR add $2,500 to the "tax due" amount at the end of this form."

    NOW HERE IS THE DANGER TO WE WHO OWN FIREARMS!!!!

    Firearms ownership may be seen by certain - read every damn one - of the private insurers (and/or whatever government entity will be, Obama's lies notwithstanding, administering this boondoggle) as a reason to jack up the "premiums". So that poor benighhted honest minority person living on meager wages might be able to afford a $125 HiPoint with which to protect him and his; but NOT THE EXTRA $500 OR MORE in coverage the "individual Mandate" could well wind up requirig him to pay.

    Now I think Obamacare will fail, because it won't get to him before the lawmakers have to go home later next month and get an earful from their constituents. But if it passes, it will give a great little insiduous side door not just to gun control but IMO a bigger loophole to allow Government meddling in private matters than the Interstate Commerce Clause (As interpreted by statists). And that is scary.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    137

    Post imported post

    Documentation? All one has to do is take a look at the history of the government getting involved in social programs Health care is not as much about the government taking care of people in need as it is about more control and more money to misappropiate and squander through wasteful programs. How about that failed social security system we have? Why would anyone trust the government with health care after the screwed up mess they made out of the social security??

    By the way HK, you are pretty good about making sweeping generalities without documentation. Health care costs going down? Yea right. Where is your documentation to support such an uninformed remark?? Oh, pardon me, the current administration says the cost will go down.





  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    c45man wrote:
    By the way HK, you are pretty good about making sweeping generalities without documentation. Health care costs going down? Yea right. Where is your documentation to support such an uninformed remark?? Oh, pardon me, the current administration says the cost will go down.





    Where's the documentation to say that it will go up? Where's the documentation to support any one of the fallacious claims made in that propaganda piece?

    As stated, the point of the plan is to push Wall Street out of the health insurance business. Peoples' health is not a business. Drug companies shouldn't have marketing departments. Hospitals shouldn't advertise. Insurance companies shouldn't have staff dedicated to finding ways to deny people coverage in order to turn a bigger profit. People shouldn't be denied coverage or dropped from coverage because they get sick and hurt profit margins. What's the point of paying into a plan that you can never use otherwise it will drop you in a heartbeat.

    The article is an unsupported propaganda piece. Have you yourself even read the bill or are you just spouting what others have told you?

  10. #10
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    AWDstylez wrote:
    c45man wrote:
    By the way HK, you are pretty good about making sweeping generalities without documentation. Health care costs going down? Yea right. Where is your documentation to support such an uninformed remark?? Oh, pardon me, the current administration says the cost will go down.





    Where's the documentation to say that it will go up? Where's the documentation to support any one of the fallacious claims made in that propaganda piece?

    As stated, the point of the plan is to push Wall Street out of the health insurance business. Peoples' health is not a business. Drug companies shouldn't have marketing departments. Hospitals shouldn't advertise. Insurance companies shouldn't have staff dedicated to finding ways to deny people coverage in order to turn a bigger profit. People shouldn't be denied coverage or dropped from coverage because they get sick and hurt profit margins. What's the point of paying into a plan that you can never use otherwise it will drop you in a heartbeat.

    The article is an unsupported propaganda piece. Have you yourself even read the bill or are you just spouting what others have told you?
    A doctor's practice is a business. Drug companies are businesses. BUSINESSES HAVE TO HANG OUT SHINGLES OR THEY GO BROKE. My health is indeed not a business. It is particularly none of Obama's god damned business. His job is to deliver the mail and defend the coast and the borders and to LEAVE ME THE F%^K ALONE. Having the Government trying to fix the current situation is NOT the answer. The answer is having people REFUSING to accept health bennies and instead demanding higher wages so they can take care of situations PRN. Let the medicos have to accept whatever people can pay out of pocket and watch the market lower costs like magic!. When the medicos find they can no longer "shoot the moon" because some deep=pocket entity will pay for everything, and competition for scarce dollars kicks in, THAT will solve whatever problems there are, with no need for government. What a nightmare----FOR THE POLITICIANS.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    Alexcabbie wrote:
    A doctor's practice is a business. Drug companies are businesses. BUSINESSES HAVE TO HANG OUT SHINGLES OR THEY GO BROKE. My health is indeed not a business. It is particularly none of Obama's god damned business. His job is to deliver the mail and defend the coast and the borders and to LEAVE ME THE F%^K ALONE. Having the Government trying to fix the current situation is NOT the answer. The answer is having people REFUSING to accept health bennies and instead demanding higher wages so they can take care of situations PRN. Let the medicos have to accept whatever people can pay out of pocket and watch the market lower costs like magic!. When the medicos find they can no longer "shoot the moon" because some deep=pocket entity will pay for everything, and competition for scarce dollars kicks in, THAT will solve whatever problems there are, with no need for government. What a nightmare----FOR THE POLITICIANS.


    LOL Yea that's working out so well right now.

    You're failing to realize that medical insurance is a necessity and has become a racket. People can't refuse it. They're forced to pay whatever the companies demand. They're forced to accept whatever terrible coverage they receive because choices are limited. Demand for medical insurance is nearly inelastic. The more they charge, the more they make, plain and simple. The only aspect that shapes demand is when people get to the point (and it's a lofty price)that it's fiscally impossible for them to afford evensimple, massive deductablecoverage, andthen they stop paying.Insurance companiescould charge the moon and the people that could afford itwould be forced to pay it, the rest are left to die. You just so happen to be above the current line of people left to die, so you have a biased perspective. Talk to some people making mortgage payment sized monthly health insurance payments to cover their families. Better yet, talk to some of the people that simply can't afford it and just hope and pray they don't get sick.Your perspectivemight change a little.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    AWDstylez wrote:
    Alexcabbie wrote:
    A doctor's practice is a business. Drug companies are businesses. BUSINESSES HAVE TO HANG OUT SHINGLES OR THEY GO BROKE. My health is indeed not a business. It is particularly none of Obama's god damned business. His job is to deliver the mail and defend the coast and the borders and to LEAVE ME THE F%^K ALONE. Having the Government trying to fix the current situation is NOT the answer. The answer is having people REFUSING to accept health bennies and instead demanding higher wages so they can take care of situations PRN. Let the medicos have to accept whatever people can pay out of pocket and watch the market lower costs like magic!. When the medicos find they can no longer "shoot the moon" because some deep=pocket entity will pay for everything, and competition for scarce dollars kicks in, THAT will solve whatever problems there are, with no need for government. What a nightmare----FOR THE POLITICIANS.


    LOL Yea that's working out so well right now.

    You're failing to realize that medical insurance is a necessity and has become a racket. People can't refuse it. They're forced to pay whatever the companies demand. They're forced to accept whatever terrible coverage they receive because choices are limited. Demand for medical insurance is nearly inelastic. The more they charge, the more they make, plain and simple. The only aspect that shapes demand is when people get to the point (and it's a lofty price)that it's fiscally impossible for them to afford evensimple, massive deductablecoverage, andthen they stop paying.Insurance companiescould charge the moon and the people that could afford itwould be forced to pay it, the rest are left to die. You just so happen to be above the current line of people left to die, so you have a biased perspective. Talk to some people making mortgage payment sized monthly health insurance payments to cover their families. Better yet, talk to some of the people that simply can't afford it and just hope and pray they don't get sick.Your perspectivemight change a little.
    Any program that the government runs cost twice as much as and be less efficientthan ifthe private sector ran it.

    Social Security sytem wouldn't be broke today if thewithholdings collected had remained in a separate account from the general funds, as it was orriginally set up. The congress critters couldn't spend that money for other vote pandering programs. That pot was growing quite well. The Dems in Cngress voted to do away with the separate account and add those moneys to the general fund so they could raid itand spend it however they chose. SS has been in trouble ever since.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Post imported post

    AWDstylez wrote:
    People that can't afford insurance are ALREADY being paid for under Medicare/Medicaid every time they go to the emergency room with a sniffle, and are being paid forat inflated, open market premiums.
    I think you need to correct your statement a little.
    I cannot afford medical coverage! And who is paying for my treatment? I pay directly out of my pocket for any and alltreatments and prescriptions! I funded my own spinal surgery at age 23, again at 29, and again at 32 years of age.
    I have tried to get insurance coverage through many diferent venues, Seems as if I was born into the wrong race, or being born as a US citizen prohibits me getting any coverage whatsoever.
    Because I refuse to be a leech on society, I am not eligible for anything. Not even a break in prescription costs . But If I chose to sit on my ass and be a burden, instead of trying to contribute to society, then I could get everything handed to me. I would rather see some planto help the working poor than our current govt programs of rewarding the shiftless lazy bungholes that leech of my tax dollars.

    All the government is trying to do with this plan is make everyone dependent on the government for their every need! And this is just another cog in the machine of socialism that is being shoved down our throats. Obamacare can justlick the sweat off my testicles on a hot August day!

    "A government that is large enough to provide for every need, is also largeenough to take it all away!"

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    Task Force 16 wrote:
    Any program that the government runs cost twice as much as and be less efficientthan ifthe private sector ran it.



    Prove it.

    The USPS can get a letter from my mailbox to California in 4 days for $0.44. It also arrives without being beaten to a pulp. Let me know when UPS, FedEx, or DHL can do that.


    Social Security is dying because of the generational profiles passing through different age brackets and points in their lives. Gen X is too small to supporttheboomers,but that's another argument.




  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    Nutczak wrote:
    AWDstylez wrote:
    People that can't afford insurance are ALREADY being paid for under Medicare/Medicaid every time they go to the emergency room with a sniffle, and are being paid forat inflated, open market premiums.
    I think you need to correct your statement a little.
    I cannot afford medical coverage! And who is paying for my treatment? I pay directly out of my pocket for any and alltreatments and prescriptions!

    Your emergency room visits are covered under Medicaid. Just because you don't abuse the system by getting a cough checked out at the emergency room doesn't mean others don't.

    What the government is trying to do is help people like you. Even if you aren't abusing the current system, the money you're wasting on grossly inflated medical costs is better spent on other things, or, better yet, retained to help you increase your standard of living at some point. You don't like the government plan? Don't go on it. That's your choice. Even if you don't, you still benefit indirectly due to lowered medical costs.

    As for the leeches of society, let me say this again, THEY'RE ALREADY BEING CARRIED. And they're being carried at inflated costs. At least with the plan we can carry them (which is inevitable) at more reasonable costs.

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    Goverment run anything is never the answer. Why not fix what we've got? Because it isn't as politically important. This health care thing is all politics. It's a win-win for Obama either way. If it passes he can claim victory because it surely won't break down until after he's out of office. If it fails he can blame the other side and get votes that way.

    I work for a living and my employer pays for part of my insurance. Because the company has around 400 people the coverage is not extremely expensive. We don't need a huge goverment program that will never work to run everything we just need to be able to band together and "group buy" our health insurance. If regulations would allow multiple business' to band together to lower insurance premiums we wouldn't have a problem and everything would still be privately run. Premiums would go down even further when the insurers have to start competing to survive. Heck, they'd be out actively recruiting businesses to get on their bandwagons.

    Goverment run health care doesn't work in China, I've seen that for myself. It doesn't work in Canada, unless you want %40 of your wages to go directly to the goverment. (40% isn't just health care). Government run health care won't work here either.

    I think this whole heathcare business could be solved with a few small regulations.

    The goverments only job IMHO is to protect us militarily and to keep us from being defrauded, other than that they can kiss my rosey red behind.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    Brass Magnet wrote:
    Goverment run anything is never the answer. Why not fix what we've got? Because it isn't as politically important. This health care thing is all politics. It's a win-win for Obama either way. If it passes he can claim victory because it surely won't break down until after he's out of office. If it fails he can blame the other side and get votes that way.

    I work for a living and my employer pays for part of my insurance. Because the company has around 400 people the coverage is not extremely expensive. We don't need a huge goverment program that will never work to run everything we just need to be able to band together and "group buy" our health insurance. If regulations would allow multiple business' to band together to lower insurance premiums we wouldn't have a problem and everything would still be privately run. Premiums would go down even further when the insurers have to start competing to survive. Heck, they'd be out actively recruiting businesses to get on their bandwagons.

    Goverment run health care doesn't work in China, I've seen that for myself. It doesn't work in Canada, unless you want %40 of your wages to go directly to the goverment. (40% isn't just health care). Government run health care won't work here either.

    I think this whole heathcare business could be solved with a few small regulations.

    The goverments only job IMHO is to protect us militarily and to keep us from being defrauded, other than that they can kiss my rosey red behind.



    Let me ask you something. If everyone in the insurance business charges $XXXXX, and people can't go without insurance... where's the motivation to drop prices? Look at it another way. Every gas station is charging $5.00/gal for gas. People can't just stop buying gas, the demand is constant regardless of price, inelastic. What motivation does any gas station have to drop their price in that situation?

    That's the problem with the "competition will lower prices"argument. It won't. There is no real competition.



    The bigger issue here is healthcare as a business. If you don't see the problems with that, let me share with you something I just wrote to someone else...
    Anyone that disagrees can start by asking themselves... why do we have advertisements for PRESCRIPTION drugs on national TV, in maganizes, in stores, etc? It's the business of the doctors to say who does and doesn't need these things, no one else. So why are we advertising them to people? Why do drug companies have marketing departments? Why is every third commercial during prime-time TV a drug ad?

    Go the doctor, tell him what's wrong, he gives you medication. Not so, anymore. Now you to the doctor, tell him that you need the wonder drug you saw on TV (the one that takes away your allergies but gives you the flu, a cold, a stroke, aching joints, liver damage, and stomach ulcers) and he gives it to you. And people wonder why this country is so over-prescribed....



    That's healthcare as a business. Did you ever stop and ask yourself why drug companies advertise? If not, stop and think about it for a second and see if it makes any sense to you.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Walton County, Georgia, ,
    Posts
    475

    Post imported post

    We already have socialized medicine, Medicare and Medicaid. The only thing is that they don't cover everyone.

    Not only will it not work well the feds do not have the constitutional authority to enact legislation regarding health insurance. Let the states deal with it. Massachusetts already has government mandated health insurance coverage, enacted in 2006. Let's give it a few more years and see how they do. Then the other states can decide if the rewards are worth the costs.

    Having the federal government rush into issues without intelligence has created enough problems.

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    I'm going to indulge you this one time in hopes that you will actually address the other points in what I wrote.

    AWDstylez wrote:
    Brass Magnet wrote:
    Goverment run anything is never the answer. Why not fix what we've got? Because it isn't as politically important. This health care thing is all politics. It's a win-win for Obama either way. If it passes he can claim victory because it surely won't break down until after he's out of office. If it fails he can blame the other side and get votes that way.

    I work for a living and my employer pays for part of my insurance. Because the company has around 400 people the coverage is not extremely expensive. We don't need a huge goverment program that will never work to run everything we just need to be able to band together and "group buy" our health insurance. If regulations would allow multiple business' to band together to lower insurance premiums we wouldn't have a problem and everything would still be privately run. Premiums would go down even further when the insurers have to start competing to survive. Heck, they'd be out actively recruiting businesses to get on their bandwagons.

    Goverment run health care doesn't work in China, I've seen that for myself. It doesn't work in Canada, unless you want %40 of your wages to go directly to the goverment. (40% isn't just health care). Government run health care won't work here either.

    I think this whole heathcare business could be solved with a few small regulations.

    The goverments only job IMHO is to protect us militarily and to keep us from being defrauded, other than that they can kiss my rosey red behind.




    Let me ask you something. If everyone in the insurance business charges $XXXXX, and people can't go without insurance... where's the motivation to drop prices? Look at it another way.
    Everyone in the insurance busines won't charge $XXXXX, if they could get away with that they'd be doing it now. Contrary to your implied belief they aren't. Quantity ofcustomers is more important for profit than only having a few that pay more. just look at Wal-Mart. Themore customers they have the further the insurance companies risks are spread out as well.
    For the purpose of my example aboveI explained the motivation to drop prices. Survival. If one insurance company is grabbing up all the people the other insurance companies will have to do something to survive. If an insurance company gets too big, the current monopoly laws will suffice. Goverment doing what it should, keeping us from being defrauded.
    Every gas station is charging $5.00/gal for gas. People can't just stop buying gas, the demand is constant regardless of price, inelastic. What motivation does any gas station have to drop their price in that situation?
    Thisseriouslyhypothetical and irrelevant to the medical debatebutI'll go ahead anyway. PeopleCAN stop buying gas. There are alternatives, it's not inelastic. Bad example.
    Now, moving this back to the issue at hand I would argue that people can stop buying insurance (unless Obama gets his way). People used to pay out of pocket and they could afford it, they certainly could again. I know doctors today that give you a considerable discount if you pay out of pocket instead of them having to deal with the insurance. There are problems with the health care industry today that wouldn't allow this on a massive scalebut they certainly can be renovated.

    That's the problem with the "competition will lower prices"argument. It won't. There is no real competition.
    Unless you have something better, I think I'vegot a good hypothesis above that it will.



    The bigger issue here is healthcare as a business. If you don't see the problems with that, let me share with you something I just wrote to someone else...
    Anyone that disagrees can start by asking themselves... why do we have advertisements for PRESCRIPTION drugs on national TV, in maganizes, in stores, etc? It's the business of the doctors to say who does and doesn't need these things, no one else. So why are we advertising them to people? Why do drug companies have marketing departments? Why is every third commercial during prime-time TV a drug ad?
    [snipped]

    That's healthcare as a business. Did you ever stop and ask yourself why drug companies advertise? If not, stop and think about it for a second and see if it makes any sense to you.
    I stopped and thought about it a long time ago. Healthcare needs to be a business. If the goverment ran everything were would the need to inovate come from. Drug companies spend millions upon millions of dollars researching new medications and cures. What funds that research? Do YOU want to fund it? I don't. Their research isfunded by selling one or two "bread and butter" drugs until their patents run out at which time generic drugs are made by other companies and competition drives the prices down. If the government had to fund all that research (and they wouldn't just like they underfund everything else that they MANDATE) the tax burden would be imense and the quality and number of new drugs would suffer horrifically.

    The goverment doesn't innovate much of anything. They (or should I say WE)may fund some innovation but the great majority of it is done in the private sector. After all, the biggest draw to a cure for cancer is the profits the drug will garner. With those profits the company can fund further innovation.

    As for the drug ads, you need to be an educated consumer just like with anything else. If you ask your doctor for your options he'll give them to you. Just like a comercial for "Frosted Flakes" you don't have to run out and get them just because Tony says "They'rrrrrrrre Great"!


    N00blet45 wrote:
    Having the federal government rush into issues without intelligence has created enough problems.
    Amen to that!

    The Federal goverment is an bureucratic entity, incapable of intelligence, even the artificial type.

    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    Brass Magnet wrote:
    Everyone in the insurance busines won't charge $XXXXX, if they could get away with that they'd be doing it now.
    But they do, and they are. It's like you trying to argue that if each OPEC country had it's own brand gas station, suddenly prices would go down. :quirky
    Thisseriouslyhypothetical and irrelevant to the medical debatebutI'll go ahead anyway. PeopleCAN stop buying gas. There are alternatives, it's not inelastic.
    But it is. Gas is about as inelastic as you get short of food and water. Did you forget that petroleum fuel consumption goes far beyond "people?" Prices go up, Exxon profits go through the roof. Guess how much gas consumption goes down? Oh wait... it doesn't.
    Now, moving this back to the issue at hand I would argue that people can stop buying insurance (unless Obama gets his way). People used to pay out of pocket and they could afford it, they certainly could again. I know doctors today that give you a considerable discount if you pay out of pocket instead of them having to deal with the insurance. There are problems with the health care industry today that wouldn't allow this on a massive scalebut they certainly can be renovated.
    YES! Thank you for that! Proving my point as we go. And guess who gets a bill for the difference? Medicare.Let me say this again. THE COSTS ARE TOO HIGH. Can it be paid for? Sure. How likely are people to spend $150 on yearly physicals when they feel ok? Not likely. What happens next? They get sick with an easily preventable condition, they're in the hospital for three days... oops... that'll run you $45,000 (true story, friend at work). Do you have that kind of money? I don't. I don't know many people that do. Have you been to the hospital before?
    I stopped and thought about it a long time ago. Healthcare needs to be a business. If the goverment ran everything were would the need to inovate come from. Drug companies spend millions upon millions of dollars researching new medications and cures. What funds that research? Do YOU want to fund it? I don't. Their research isfunded by selling one or two "bread and butter" drugs until their patents run out at which time generic drugs are made by other companies and competition drives the prices down. If the government had to fund all that research (and they wouldn't just like they underfund everything else that they MANDATE) the tax burden would be imense and the quality and number of new drugs would suffer horrifically.
    Again, the ignorance is ASTOUNDING. We ALREADY subsidize ALL KINDS of scientific research, medical included. Let me ask you a better question. What motive do drug companies have to cure diseases instead of simply keeping people alive, whilesellingthem lots of maintainancemedication? I'll leave you with this (post from another board)....
    Think about the basic concept of capitalism with regard to pharmacutical companies. Now let's focus on economies of scale. For those who don't understand this term a brief explanation...When you make something new, it doesn't materialize out of thin air. There are development costs, research costs, production costs, et al. Everyone of these people must be paid for their work and the way pricing points are constructed is by determining total cost of development, manufacture and delivery. ALL OF IT!So just as with automobiles, the more you can make and sell, the better the pricing offered to the consumer while maintaining profit margin.Now, think about a pill that cures versus a pill that treats. The cure would be expensive simply because there is no repeat customers, hopefully. The pharmacutical companies would have to charge an outrageous price to recoup their investment and maintain a profit margin they deemed appropriate. As where a cure could AND would be massed produced to keep the customer alive long enough to buy another dose.If you can't see the inequity of such a scheme then I am not going to be able to suade you. That's not a liberal or conservative point of you. That is a realists point of view. no spin, just the way it works.


  21. #21
    Regular Member thx997303's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lehi, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,716

    Post imported post

    Government run anything is not the answer.

    Little story, was on a detail with the supply guy for our battalion, and we go up to the air force base where they normally get supplies, which is a good 30 miles away from battalion.

    We walk in, and I immediately notice the prices are through the roof.

    Find the items we need, and go to check out, and it takes literally an hour to do. We were only getting less than a pickup full of supplies.

    Well, turns out everyone working in this shop is blind, excluding the manager.

    So, after inquiring about this, the supply guy explains to me how the government mandates they procure their supplies.

    They give them an "approved vendor" list, which are the only places they can buy supplies.

    The only vendors on that list are veteran owned, or charity type like this one.

    Problem is, since the local units can only buy from an approved list, they get tons of business. And the business is government mandated.

    So, they raise their prices, and the army blindly pays 40 dollars for a simple shovel, the kind I buy at wal maret for 10 or less.

    And on the healthcare note, socialist healthcare sucks monkey balls.

    We have it in the military.

    To get seen for something, I wake up at 0400 and go wait in line a minimum of 4 hours, with probably 200 others who are supposedly sick, or injured. (Bull, most of them go there to get out of pt)

    I finally get to a doctor, who will only look at one condition. And they almost never go beyond me telling them what my symptoms are.

    Then they give me an otc fix, I leave do what they tell me, and come back and repeat the process in a day or two because it isn't getting better, because they were in a hurry and didn't properly diagnose my problem.

    So the second time usually ends up in ,e getting sent to the army hospital nearby, usually 2 weeks later because they are always booked up.

    Then I might get proper care.

    Everyone goes in if they even have a small cough, and overall it just sucks.

    Just my .02

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    AWDstylez wrote:

    .....



    Once again you've proven that you don't know how to debate ethically, stuck inbait n' switcharguments, and won't touch on any of the points that you'll lose with a ten foot pole. It's completely worthless to even acknowledge your existence.

    For example:

    I said the current system needs to be renovated, not ran by the goverment. I never said the current system was perfect. This is what all I posted was based upon.The exception to this iswhen I was obviously wasting my time answering your hypothetical questions. The first rule of debate is to agree on what is being debated.

    I also talked about "group buying" insurance which you never addressed; most likelybecause your argument would fail on a number of levels.

    For more examples you posted this:

    Brass Magnet wrote:
    Everyone in the insurance busines won't charge $XXXXX, if they could get away with that they'd be doing it now.
    AWDstylez wrote:
    But they do, and they are. It's like you trying to argue that if each OPEC country had it's own brand gas station, suddenly prices would go down. :quirky
    Not only extremely rude; you also convieniently left out this:
    Contrary to your implied belief they aren't. Quantity ofcustomers is more important for profit than only having a few that pay more. just look at Wal-Mart. Themore customers they have the further the insurance companies risks are spread out as well.
    Why leave it out? Because you don't follow the rules toa proper debate.

    Oh, then you decided that your example of a gas station is relavant just because you say it is:

    Brass Magnet wrote:
    Thisseriouslyhypothetical and irrelevant to the medical debatebutI'll go ahead anyway. PeopleCAN stop buying gas. There are alternatives, it's not inelastic.
    AWDstylez wrote:
    But it is. Gas is about as inelastic as you get short of food and water. Did you forget that petroleum fuel consumption goes far beyond "people?" Prices go up, Exxon profits go through the roof. Guess how much gas consumption goes down? Oh wait... it doesn't.
    Hey look, you say it is, without any proof, once again. But it's not. (not only because I say it's not)If we really can't afford it you can be darn sure we will find an alternative source or in my case, just go hunting, fishing, and grow my own food. How can you even try to defend this totally irrelevantargument?

    Let's relate it to health care: You have a nail in your foot and will die of infection but a doctor costs too much money. Hmmmm, I guessyou just die huh?If you want to go ahead,I'llpull it out and douse the wound with alcohol.

    Oh darn, I just bothered to feed you again.



    Anyhoo, what's next on the AWDstylez buffet of delusion? Oh yes, personal attacks.

    AWDstylez wrote:

    Again, the ignorance is ASTOUNDING. We ALREADY subsidize ALL KINDS of scientific research, medical included. Let me ask you a better question. What motive do drug companies have to cure diseases instead of simply keeping people alive, whilesellingthem lots of maintainancemedication? I'll leave you with this (post from another board)....

    Really? I had no idea that we subsidized ALL KINDS of scientific research:quirky. So, you want to subsidize even more?

    Your debates are not worth the pixels they are displayed with, nor the wasted packets of bandwidth used to convey them. I tried to have a civil debate with you and once again you've proven that you are incapable.

    It's too bad this forum doesn't have an "ignore user" function. If it did, you'd be talking to yourself and maybe one other guy.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Walton County, Georgia, ,
    Posts
    475

    Post imported post

    thx997303 wro
    And on the healthcare note, socialist healthcare sucks monkey balls.

    We have it in the military.

    To get seen for something, I wake up at 0400 and go wait in line a minimum of 4 hours, with probably 200 others who are supposedly sick, or injured. (Bull, most of them go there to get out of pt)

    I finally get to a doctor, who will only look at one condition. And they almost never go beyond me telling them what my symptoms are.

    Then they give me an otc fix, I leave do what they tell me, and come back and repeat the process in a day or two because it isn't getting better, because they were in a hurry and didn't properly diagnose my problem.

    So the second time usually ends up in ,e getting sent to the army hospital nearby, usually 2 weeks later because they are always booked up.

    Then I might get proper care.

    Everyone goes in if they even have a small cough, and overall it just sucks.

    Just my .02
    That's why I never went to sick call. All they'd do is give you some Air Force candy (Motrin).

    I was stationed at Buckley AFB, CO. We had pretty good health care, but they contracted all the major services out to local practice because the base was recently bought and didn't have a hospital.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    Brass Magnet wrote:
    For example:

    I said the current system needs to be renovated, not ran by the goverment. I never said the current system was perfect.


    This is not an argument, it's an observation - a blatantly obvious one, at that. I don't have to address observations. When you come up with your version of ahealth care solution for this country, then you've got an argument that we can debate. Until then, you're just whining without contributing anything.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    Brass Magnet wrote:
    Not only extremely rude; you also convieniently left out this:
    Contrary to your implied belief they aren't. Quantity ofcustomers is more important for profit than only having a few that pay more. just look at Wal-Mart. Themore customers they have the further the insurance companies risks are spread out as well.
    Why leave it out? Because you don't follow the rules toa proper debate.

    Why leave it out? Because it's a obvious lie. If this was true then our current system would be working fine. Oligarcihes don't function like perfect competition does, neither do products or services with inelastic demand. There IS NOT real, true competition in health insurance. EVERYONE is a rip off.

    Just because you make a off-the-wall, competely incorrect"point," with nothing to back it, doesn't mean I have to address it as valid.

Page 1 of 10 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •