mnealtx 0
Recommended Posts
You mean like the rooms in drug and alcohol treatment (hot meals, etc) that the city and county both offered both of them that refused by both because it would be so many orders of magnitude cheaper?
I'm afraid that it's been tried. The lack of support isn't an issue. These guys don't want that assistance. Just the free rides.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
I'm afraid that it's been tried. The lack of support isn't an issue. These guys don't want that assistance. Just the free rides.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
ShcShc11 0
QuoteAnd you are correct - I'm not focusing on whether the system is working. I'm focusing on the inequities, Constitutionality, abrogations of freedoms, and long-term inefficiency of a system that forces the healthy to provide spending money for the ill. Truly these are thought exercises.
Haha lawrocket. I think we’l agree here. The economic (and functionality) side of the system is what I focus on. Pragmatism is important. If it doesn’t work in real-life then what’s the point?
e.g: War conscription ordered is probably an intrusion of personal freedom, but it is “legal” because there are extraordinary cases where pragmatism has to be taken into account.
Quotewe heard the same thing from Bush and Cheney about the Patriot Act, justifying what they were doing and minimizing the loss of freedoms as just lefty spin from people who want to see American destroyed and our citizens killed.
This is unrelated with the healthcare issue, but I do support Bush’s Patriot Act. Based on what has been released, it did show some real result in capturing key figures. It probably does impede personal freedom, but it is absolutely naive to think that it didn’t do good and/or Al Qaeda wasn’t planning anything.
It has however been abused by some people for “other non-terrorism” purposes.
I support Reagan’s action in his 1980s and did a spectacular job on the Soviet Union. Jimmy Carter is rightfully criticized for his non-intervention in the Middle East which led to the USSR Afghanistan invasion.
And even if Reagan’s supply-side economics in the 1980s on stagflation was the right one, the stimulus for 2008-2009 was the right action because it was a zero-bound economic crisis (not stagflation).
Frankly, I couldn’t care less about political affiliation as long as there are real (pragmatic) evidences to it.
QuoteNote: it never works in argument to tell someone "you need to understand." It can't't be done without speaking down to people. And often times we DO understand exactly what we you are saying. I understand why it was done. It comes off as condescending.
1) When I keep reading your paragraphs, it’s pretty clear that you don’t understand it. You keep saying “it is about the cost shifting hands” when it’s about the overall cost/expenditure AND the quality AND accessibility.
2) Rest assure that I am not trying to be condescending, look down or whatever. The point for me to write and spend any time on this is to understand the other side of it and trying to figure out the rationality/evidences given.
3) I remember someone who said: “Arguing in the internet is like running in the special Olympics. Even if we win, we’re still retarded”
. In other words, never take these arguments personally. Anyway, the next paragraphs are about me emphasizing the economics-side of it again since that is the part where the main argument divides. Read if you like.
QuoteThe ACA doesn't change this. The ACA shifts the cost of this system to people who aren't paying into it now. You understand that. You do!
One of the clear goals of ACA is to diminish healthcare cost based on the GDP. That is probably one of THE main points in creating the system in the first place. Going back to the 1990s with HilaryCare and Heritage (aka ObamaRomneyCare), their primary stated goal was to bring the cost to a “reasonable level”. When Bill Clinton criticized about the health care system in post-presidency, it was always about the cost...how even the most expensive Health Care in Europe cost 13-14% of its GDP while the U.S are paying 18%.
With all the talk about how Obamacare’s cost will explode (by people who are either arguing in bad faith or people who don’t bother to look at the CBO financial numbers on it), it almost became counter-intuitive to think Obamacare is going make it “efficient”.
And I absolutely get it when you say:
QuoteJust less expensive for those who use it most (think of the honeless guys who call ambulances twice a day.
QuoteMaybe you view it differently from me, but others bearing the cost encourages waste.
This makes perfect sense (it almost sounds common sense). However, when we look at real-life examples of different systems whether it is with Universal Health Care System or Massachussets RomneyCare, the cost caused by the “homeless guys” do not dwarf the cost savings of the overall system. You might think its “political bullshit” when they talk about the cost, but that is one of the main objective in creating a new system in the first place.
A Non-Profit Health Care Option proposed in Summer 2010 was quickly shot down- it doesn’t reduce the overall GDP % cost.
This is why I also keep asking: what are the alternatives if not for the Heritage/Obama/RomneyCare -or- Universal Health Care? And let’s be honest here: I don’t think there’s is anything else that was seriously proposed.
Hugs & Cheers
Shc
nanook 1
QuoteQuoteIt just may well happen if we lose a lot of disposable income due to the considerable increase of taxes. Those countries rely on us heavily to buy their goods.
If all Americans die and the USA vaporizes, it'll be a rough decade, and after that it'll be business as usual. Please don't overestimate your role in the world, you're replaceable.
If it makes you feel better believing that. But that doesn't mean anything. It's not even even empowerment. All countries are replaceable.
_____________________________
"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln
"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln
Willful ignorance? Must be speaking to your own posts again, since you believe that personal choices reflect on healthcare or medical care.
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites