Recommended Posts
kallend 1,647
www.politifact.com/subjects/health-care/
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
tkhayes 140
I believe the ACA will likely fail, because it was half-assed and only addresses small bits of the overall problem. But that's OK, because my predication has always been that we will then replace it with a public/private, universal and/or single payer system that does actually work.
"Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities." -
-- attributed to Winston Churchill but disputed by some.
"Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities." -
-- attributed to Winston Churchill but disputed by some.
mpohl 1
I am surprised by your optimistic outlook and the confidence you have in the reasoning abilities of the average American.
To whit: "Skydiving should be banned! No one needs to skydive! They say if you skydive you are 40 times more likely to be killed skydiving than those who don't. If we could only save one life! Just one! If skydiving was banned that one life would have been saved!"
Comment on CNN.com regarding today's fatality in TN. You think you can argue rationally with those kind of people? And make no mistake...they are in the majority.
P.S.: Meaningful changes don't come thru learned and reasoned discourse. I gave up on that notion a long time ago.
To whit: "Skydiving should be banned! No one needs to skydive! They say if you skydive you are 40 times more likely to be killed skydiving than those who don't. If we could only save one life! Just one! If skydiving was banned that one life would have been saved!"
Comment on CNN.com regarding today's fatality in TN. You think you can argue rationally with those kind of people? And make no mistake...they are in the majority.
P.S.: Meaningful changes don't come thru learned and reasoned discourse. I gave up on that notion a long time ago.
tkhayesI believe the ACA will likely fail, because it was half-assed and only addresses small bits of the overall problem. But that's OK, because my predication has always been that we will then replace it with a public/private, universal and/or single payer system that does actually work.
"Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities." -
-- attributed to Winston Churchill but disputed by some.
tkhayes 140
um....I did say that I think the ACA will fail. that's called 'optimistic' ?
And I do not care much about what CNN says about skydiving. In the end, skydiving is small. Healthcare is not.
And I do not care much about what CNN says about skydiving. In the end, skydiving is small. Healthcare is not.
tkhayesI believe the ACA will likely fail, because it was half-assed and only addresses small bits of the overall problem. But that's OK, because my predication has always been that we will then replace it with a public/private, universal and/or single payer system that does actually work.
"Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities." -
-- attributed to Winston Churchill but disputed by some.
I'm surprised that anybody out there honestly believes that there can be a healthcare system that works for everybody. There isn't. Because healthcare is such an individual thing there is neither a "one size fits all" solution nor a socioeconomic approach that doesn't mean some people are worse off than they were before.
That's because of the differences in people. Understandably, there are people in this world who would desire to have less expensive health care and would be willing to sacrifice quality for price. Would be willing to sacrifice on-demand availability.
There's only one way to ensure fairness to all and that's to make it suck for everybody. I've frequently written on here that there are three policy considerations for health care that are generally considered desirable: (1) low cost; (2) high quality; and (3) available on demand. A fundamental rule with regard to health care is that you cannot have all three. You can't. It's never, ever been accomplished.
The closest thing we had was before Medicare. Yes, there were people who were elderly and couldn't afford all the medical ccare that the elderly need. Well, by golly by gee, now Medicare cannot afford all the medical care that the elderly need. So something has to give.
A single payer system won't "actually work." Everybody under a single-payer system has their complaints, too. Lots of them actually come here for treatment.
No matter what system is set up there will be broken parts. And those broken parts will daisy chain. Why do I like the older system more? Because I leave you alone. You leave me alone.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
tkhayesI believe the ACA will likely fail, because it was half-assed and only addresses small bits of the overall problem. But that's OK, because my predication has always been that we will then replace it with a public/private, universal and/or single payer system that does actually work.
"Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities." -
-- attributed to Winston Churchill but disputed by some.
I'm surprised that anybody out there honestly believes that there can be a healthcare system that works for everybody. There isn't. Because healthcare is such an individual thing there is neither a "one size fits all" solution nor a socioeconomic approach that doesn't mean some people are worse off than they were before.
That's because of the differences in people. Understandably, there are people in this world who would desire to have less expensive health care and would be willing to sacrifice quality for price. Would be willing to sacrifice on-demand availability.
There's only one way to ensure fairness to all and that's to make it suck for everybody. I've frequently written on here that there are three policy considerations for health care that are generally considered desirable: (1) low cost; (2) high quality; and (3) available on demand. A fundamental rule with regard to health care is that you cannot have all three. You can't. It's never, ever been accomplished.
The closest thing we had was before Medicare. Yes, there were people who were elderly and couldn't afford all the medical ccare that the elderly need. Well, by golly by gee, now Medicare cannot afford all the medical care that the elderly need. So something has to give.
A single payer system won't "actually work." Everybody under a single-payer system has their complaints, too. Lots of them actually come here for treatment.
No matter what system is set up there will be broken parts. And those broken parts will daisy chain. Why do I like the older system more? Because I leave you alone. You leave me alone.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
turtlespeed 212
. . . You can say THAT again.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
tkhayes 140
QuoteI'm surprised that anybody out there honestly believes that there can be a healthcare system that works for everybody.
no one is making that claim nor trying to reach that goal. But an achievable goal might be a healthcare system that works for more people for less money.
QuoteThere's only one way to ensure fairness to all and that's to make it suck for everybody.
Not so. There are already many examples of healthcare systems around the world that provide better results for
less money for all citizens. Ignoring them does not make your case.
Medicare can easily afford all the healthcare people need. Again, already being done in other countries. For start, we should combine Medicare, Medicaid, VA and whatever other govt-run plans into one. It does not make sense to have the overhead of managing multiple systems. If you are handing out healthcare, then hand it out, from one agency.
And just because people complain does not make a system invalid. If that were the case, then the US system was fucked a long time ago.
And yes, there will be broken parts. read my 2nd sentence again.
[Reply]
no one is making that claim nor trying to reach that goal. But an achievable goal might be a healthcare system that works for more people for less money.
no one is making that claim nor trying to reach that goal. But an achievable goal might be a healthcare system that works for more people for less money.
Some things:
(1) the ACA is the furthest thing from "less money." It's hugely expansive and increases costs as a whole. What it decreases are the individual costs for those who were uninsurable. Those are covered by the young and healthy.
(2) It's easy to do healthcare for less money. Either lower the quality or ration it. It appears that they are working on both (take a look at the increased scopes of practice for PAs, nurses and psychologists. Psychologists are being suggested for prescribing meds to lower costs (yes. Psychologists are starting to prescribe meds. Sure, they can't prescribe blood tests or a CT, but let's give them the power to prescribe). Lower the quality and ration the doctors (HMOs ration doctors, too. It's why you'll need a referral to a specialist).
(3) It apparently doesn't even work for more people, because it leaves 10% of the population uninsured and also leaves plenty without work or with fewer hours working.
I really do scratch my head and ask, "Did they deliberately choose to do the worst possible thing because they wanted to say, 'Fuck you, we can' or did they do it so that Americans would find anything to be better than this?"
I think the latter.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
mpohl 1
Why don't you just shut up for a moment and take some time to learn. Rather than spewing your uninformed BS and using up electrons.
Look at health-care systems around the world, single payer or non-profit multi-payer. Even better...live with them for ten years. Through a major illness, child birth, regular maintenance, drug prescriptions.Then talk to us again. INSIGHTFUL, from personal experience...
Looking only at your own navel...well, your view is pretty limited!!!
Some things:
(1) the ACA is the furthest thing from "less money." It's hugely expansive and increases costs as a whole. What it decreases are the individual costs for those who were uninsurable. Those are covered by the young and healthy.
(2) It's easy to do healthcare for less money. Either lower the quality or ration it. It appears that they are working on both (take a look at the increased scopes of practice for PAs, nurses and psychologists. Psychologists are being suggested for prescribing meds to lower costs (yes. Psychologists are starting to prescribe meds. Sure, they can't prescribe blood tests or a CT, but let's give them the power to prescribe). Lower the quality and ration the doctors (HMOs ration doctors, too. It's why you'll need a referral to a specialist).
(3) It apparently doesn't even work for more people, because it leaves 10% of the population uninsured and also leaves plenty without work or with fewer hours working.
I really do scratch my head and ask, "Did they deliberately choose to do the worst possible thing because they wanted to say, 'Fuck you, we can' or did they do it so that Americans would find anything to be better than this?"
I think the latter.
Look at health-care systems around the world, single payer or non-profit multi-payer. Even better...live with them for ten years. Through a major illness, child birth, regular maintenance, drug prescriptions.Then talk to us again. INSIGHTFUL, from personal experience...
Looking only at your own navel...well, your view is pretty limited!!!
lawrocket[Reply]
no one is making that claim nor trying to reach that goal. But an achievable goal might be a healthcare system that works for more people for less money.
Some things:
(1) the ACA is the furthest thing from "less money." It's hugely expansive and increases costs as a whole. What it decreases are the individual costs for those who were uninsurable. Those are covered by the young and healthy.
(2) It's easy to do healthcare for less money. Either lower the quality or ration it. It appears that they are working on both (take a look at the increased scopes of practice for PAs, nurses and psychologists. Psychologists are being suggested for prescribing meds to lower costs (yes. Psychologists are starting to prescribe meds. Sure, they can't prescribe blood tests or a CT, but let's give them the power to prescribe). Lower the quality and ration the doctors (HMOs ration doctors, too. It's why you'll need a referral to a specialist).
(3) It apparently doesn't even work for more people, because it leaves 10% of the population uninsured and also leaves plenty without work or with fewer hours working.
I really do scratch my head and ask, "Did they deliberately choose to do the worst possible thing because they wanted to say, 'Fuck you, we can' or did they do it so that Americans would find anything to be better than this?"
I think the latter.
[Reply]Why don't you just shut up for a moment and take some time to learn.
The reason my forefathers left Europe is because of the flippant and ill-considered arrogance of the Europeans. Telling people to "shut up" and be "re-educated" is certainly the way of doing things by our friends across the Pond. Seriously - "shut up and listen" is about as insulting as one can get. You are not that important.
X@[Reply]Rather than spewing your uninformed BS and using up electrons.
Then inform me. How cab a health care system be inexpensive, high quality and available on demand? There hasn't been a system yet that hasn't compromised at least one.
So tell me about it. Educate me, professor. Baron of Knowledge.
I've looked at health care systems around the world and I know that everybody bitches about their health-care system. Every place - people bitch. About either the wait, the cost or the quality.
If you disagree then disagree. But when you are disagreeabel in your disagreement I will tend to look at you as just venting.
Now, try not shutting up and try putting out something that is educational and useful. Instead of the pseudo-dominant "shut up" bullshit. That don't fly with me. Or anybody, for that matter.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
tkhayes 140
QuoteI really do scratch my head and ask, "Did they deliberately choose to do the worst possible thing because they wanted to say, 'Fuck you, we can' or did they do it so that Americans would find anything to be better than this?"
I think the latter.
I think you missed most of the post that I wrote. as well as the one prior to that.
But whatever. continue to rant about it. The USA will do the right thing after we have exhausted every other possible option.
rushmc 18
tkhayesQuoteI really do scratch my head and ask, "Did they deliberately choose to do the worst possible thing because they wanted to say, 'Fuck you, we can' or did they do it so that Americans would find anything to be better than this?"
I think the latter.
I think you missed most of the post that I wrote. as well as the one prior to that.
I hope it will do the right thing
The next two elections will tell
But whatever. continue to rant about it. The USA will do the right thing after we have exhausted every other possible option.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
mpohl
Why don't you just shut up for a moment and take some time to learn. Rather than spewing your uninformed BS and using up electrons.
Look at health-care systems around the world, single payer or non-profit multi-payer. Even better...live with them for ten years. Through a major illness, child birth, regular maintenance, drug prescriptions.Then talk to us again. INSIGHTFUL, from personal experience...
Looking only at your own navel...well, your view is pretty limited!!!
***[Reply]
no one is making that claim nor trying to reach that goal. But an achievable goal might be a healthcare system that works for more people for less money.
Some things:
(1) the ACA is the furthest thing from "less money." It's hugely expansive and increases costs as a whole. What it decreases are the individual costs for those who were uninsurable. Those are covered by the young and healthy.
(2) It's easy to do healthcare for less money. Either lower the quality or ration it. It appears that they are working on both (take a look at the increased scopes of practice for PAs, nurses and psychologists. Psychologists are being suggested for prescribing meds to lower costs (yes. Psychologists are starting to prescribe meds. Sure, they can't prescribe blood tests or a CT, but let's give them the power to prescribe). Lower the quality and ration the doctors (HMOs ration doctors, too. It's why you'll need a referral to a specialist).
(3) It apparently doesn't even work for more people, because it leaves 10% of the population uninsured and also leaves plenty without work or with fewer hours working.
I really do scratch my head and ask, "Did they deliberately choose to do the worst possible thing because they wanted to say, 'Fuck you, we can' or did they do it so that Americans would find anything to be better than this?"
I think the latter.
I spent a lot of time with my family in Italy. My wife is diabetic as is one of my Italian cousins. She gets far better care with the most advanced medications by comparison to him. They live in Rome and not some rural backwater, fyi. The difference is so great that we have indefinitely postponed building a retirement home there for her fear of inferior medical care. I fully support her.
The problem is more complicated than you want to admit. the USA is not Europe. They do not have nearly as many poor people nor open immigration. Its not apples to apples.
"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante
John Frusciante
[Url]http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/09/23/its-official-obamacare-will-increase-health-spending-by-7450-for-a-typical-family-of-four/[/url]
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites