Obama Care Could Be Deadly

[quote name='Knoell']Ok so what about the other 200+ million people. They just don't have health problems?[/QUOTE]

Millions of those people are on government programs of one form or another where they for the most part don't have to deal with that kind of BS.

How much healthcare do you think elderly people would get if they had to rely on private insurance companies?
 
[quote name='Knoell']everyone is for a better system lol. its a myth that conservatives are against reform.

So in your eyes there is no welfare problem? ;)

You guys need to open your eyes.[/QUOTE]

Another cool deflection, man. You must've gotten your debate training at a certain Wal-Mart in southern Illinois.

Conservatives are for a better system? They why are they so against a plan that's pretty much a carbon copy of the one they submitted years ago?

If you're a better system, what's your plan? What do you personally stand for?
 
[quote name='depascal22']Another cool deflection, man. You must've gotten your debate training at a certain Wal-Mart in southern Illinois.

Conservatives are for a better system? They why are they so against a plan that's pretty much a carbon copy of the one they submitted years ago?

If you're a better system, what's your plan? What do you personally stand for?[/QUOTE]

It is not a carbon copy of a plan they submitted years ago. I stand for cutting health care costs rather than adding to them. We have all heard stories of medicare purchasing $100 dollar pieces of equipment for $2000 dollars, and patients getting millions of dollars in fraudulent lawsuits against doctors and hospitals.
Why don't we start by fixing these situations and lowering health care costs so more people can naturally afford it, rather than having the government force everyone onto insurance whether they can afford it or not, pretending that because everyone is on it, rates will decline. The plan is not deficit neutral, it will cost more than projected as it has in every state that has adopted simliar plans.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Millions of those people are on government programs of one form or another where they for the most part don't have to deal with that kind of BS.

How much healthcare do you think elderly people would get if they had to rely on private insurance companies?[/QUOTE]

Ok what about the other 150 million?
 
[quote name='Knoell']Ok what about the other 150 million?[/QUOTE]

They just pay several times more, if they stay relatively healthy and remain profitable for a private insurance company.

I must say you have a ridiculously low threshold for declaring something a success (let alone number one).

This is the sound of me putting on my FoC hat btw.

Let's just say I run a restaurant and so do you.

Your restaurant is kind of like mine except the food at yours costs at least twice as much for equal or lesser quality and in your restaurant patrons run the very real risk of either getting kicked out or being handed a bill for their entire bank balance and beyond.

Michelin doesn't think you deserve a star because not literally every single one of your patrons gets the rawest of deals.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Ok what about the other 150 million?[/QUOTE]

http://www.orangeandbluehue.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/appstate-goalposts.jpg

appstate-goalposts.jpg


What does your debate style have in common with this picture?
 
Msut, despite the whole having to buy healthcare provision of the new plan or pay a fine. Do you think that the millions without coverage currently will still choose not to buy it, then just hurry up and hop on it as soon as they get diagnosed with cancer?
 
[quote name='xxDOYLExx']Msut, despite the whole having to buy healthcare provision of the new plan or pay a fine. Do you think that the millions without coverage currently will still choose not to buy it, then just hurry up and hop on it as soon as they get diagnosed with cancer?[/QUOTE]

I think the amount of people who do that will be relatively few.

The subsidies will be in place and they are relatively generous. People in general terms are risk averse and while someone could in theory pay the fine and do without and then go ahead and sign up for a plan if they are feeling sick (again this is the thought process of a relatively small group of malcontents) it would be awfully difficult to do so in the second before a major accident for example.
 
[quote name='Msut77']They just pay several times more, if they stay relatively healthy and remain profitable for a private insurance company.

I must say you have a ridiculously low threshold for declaring something a success (let alone number one).

This is the sound of me putting on my FoC hat btw.

Let's just say I run a restaurant and so do you.

Your restaurant is kind of like mine except the food at yours costs at least twice as much for equal or lesser quality and in your restaurant patrons run the very real risk of either getting kicked out or being handed a bill for their entire bank balance and beyond.

Michelin doesn't think you deserve a star because not literally every single one of your patrons gets the rawest of deals.[/QUOTE]

Ok so we narrowed it down to cost, and preexisting conditions.

How does the current bill fix either of those?

Preexisting condition may have been fixed but what is stopping people from just not buying insurance until they get sick? A government fine that the IRS can't enforce?

Cost - I still have yet to see how this bill lowers cost in the least.
 
[quote name='Msut77']I think the amount of people who do that will be relatively few.

The subsidies will be in place and they are relatively generous. People in general terms are risk averse and while someone could in theory pay the fine and do without and then go ahead and sign up for a plan if they are feeling sick (again this is the thought process of a relatively small group of malcontents) it would be awfully difficult to do so in the second before a major accident for example.[/QUOTE]

major accidents like cars, or in the workplace are usually covered by other types of insurance. I think the majority of cases for health care are dealing with heart disease, cancer, and such that require surgery. So what is stopping people from jumping on insurance when they are told they need surgery?
 
[quote name='Knoell']Ok so we narrowed it down to cost, and preexisting conditions.[/quote]

No we didn't.

How does the current bill fix either of those?
Click to expand...

It has the beginnings of some very real cost savings although it is admittedly weaker than it could be.

Preexisting condition may have been fixed
Click to expand...

This is the first time you have answered a question and it is your own damn question.
 
[quote name='Msut77']No we didn't.



It has the beginnings of some very real cost savings although it is admittedly weaker than it could be.



This is the first time you have answered a question and it is your own damn question.[/QUOTE]

Out of the 200 million people you say are getting screwed by healthcare you complained about 1) cost 2) preexisting conditions

What cost savings exactly?
 
Rant:
I don't mind subsiding the folks who truly need it, but I have spent a good deal of my life working with "underprivileged" people (at my own expense) who just don't want to be productive members of society. We offer them jobs, education, life skills, rehab the list goes on. At the end of the day they just want to have their sears card, cell phone, cable, cars, illegitimate children and bitch about how they cant afford insurance. Which is the whole idea because the organization I was involved with paid their med bills.

I can see this plan being taken advantage of six ways from Sunday.

Its hard to take a pragmatic approach when your dealing with human life.
 
[quote name='xxDOYLExx']Rant:
I don't mind subsiding the folks who truly need it, but I have spent a good deal of my life working with "underprivileged" people (at my own expense) who just don't want to be productive members of society. We offer them jobs, education, life skills, rehab the list goes on. At the end of the day they just want to have their sears card, cell phone, cable, cars, illegitimate children and bitch about how they cant afford insurance. Which is the whole idea because the organization I was involved with paid their med bills.

I can see this plan being taken advantage of six ways from Sunday.

Its hard to take a pragmatic approach when your dealing with human life.[/QUOTE]

Be careful man, those type of commonsense statements around here get you called racist.
 
[quote name='Knoell']major accidents like cars, or in the workplace are usually covered by other types of insurance. I think the majority of cases for health care are dealing with heart disease, cancer, and such that require surgery. So what is stopping people from jumping on insurance when they are told they need surgery?[/QUOTE]

Most people with auto insurance (if they even have it, which incidentally is law) are insured for only the statutory limits for BI. This is a whole other can of worms.
 
[quote name='xxDOYLExx']I don't mind subsiding the folks who truly need it, but I have spent a good deal of my life working with "underprivileged" people (at my own expense) who just don't want to be productive members of society. We offer them jobs, education, life skills, rehab the list goes on. At the end of the day they just want to have their sears card, cell phone, cable, cars, illegitimate children and bitch about how they cant afford insurance. Which is the whole idea because the organization I was involved with paid their med bills.[/quote]

Now they should be able to buy insurance, I don't want to repeat myself but there is the carrot of subsidies and the stick of the mandate (as long as people don't go and spoil it by pointing out it is relatively toothless).

I can see this plan being taken advantage of six ways from Sunday.
Click to expand...

I have a buddy that feels the same way about most things and I'll tell you the same thing I tell him, there will always be a few people who take advantage and try to ruin things for everyone else. You got to learn to deal, the only other options are to do absolutely nothing or practice putting your toe on the trigger.

Its hard to take a pragmatic approach when your dealing with human life.
Click to expand...

This isn't directed at you at all but I see people who get so riled up about this stuff even after one points out the numbers are relatively piddling.

Spending trillions of dollars to bomb brown people for no good reason is ok for many, but the idea of a brown child getting a bowl of oatmeal on their dime causes them to lose sleep at night.

I don't really call that pragmatic.
 
[quote name='xxDOYLExx']Most people with auto insurance (if they even have it, which incidentally is law) are insured for only the statutory limits for BI. This is a whole other can of worms.[/QUOTE]
Agreed but compared to the other conditions such as heart disease and cancer, accidents are a small percentage.
 
[quote name='Msut77']

Spending trillions of dollars to bomb brown people for no good reason is ok for many, but the idea of a brown child getting a bowl of oatmeal on their dime causes them to lose sleep at night.

I don't really call that pragmatic.[/QUOTE]

what the hell are you talking about dude, you are way out of line here. America by far is the most charitable nation in the world. We give more to the rest of the world than ANY other country. So stop quoting this we hate brown people and just want to bomb them BS.

Who was there for Haiti? Us, did we complain? No,
Chile? US, did we complain? No
Africas aids, and food epidemic? Did we complain about the trillions we send there? No

Stop with your bullshit
 
[quote name='Knoell']Let's start with its first point.[/quote]

Try reading the whole thing.

It is the least you can do.

How do you figure?
Click to expand...

Depends on what you mean by competition, insurance companies previously competed by racing to see who could exclude as many unprofitable people as possible for the purposes of profit and executive pay.

Now hopefully they will compete to offer the best bang for the buck for consumers, aka us.

And as for the cost controls by eliminating pre-existing conditions you won't have what is basically an entire layer of bureaucracy devoted to denying people care and trying to ferret out the sick.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Who was there for Haiti? Us, did we complain? No,
[/QUOTE]

Rofl. There were people on this site bitching about how "we need to take care of our country first!" I guarantee you there were millions around America echoing the same comments, talking about how "my money gon go to debbil worshpers over in that thar Haytee."
 
[quote name='Strell']Rofl. There were people on this site bitching about how "we need to take care of our country first!"[/QUOTE]

yet again, taking the point and running off in an unintended direction. Msut seems to think that America just wants to bomb "brown" people all day instead of helping our own "brown" people.

How many federal social programs are there to help people? How many state? how many county?

We do our share of "helping" low income people. There is a point in which certain people do not want to excel in their lives and are comfortable where they are however depressing it may be to us. People have to make a choice to succeed you cannot force them with free money. It just doesn't work.
 
[quote name='Knoell']yet again, taking the point and running off in an unintended direction. Msut seems to think that America just wants to bomb "brown" people all day instead of helping our own "brown" people.[/quote]

Piss off. You said "Did America complain when we helped Haiti? No." And that is absolutely untrue. Don't make an untrue statement and then backpedal when it can be easily demonstrated it's false. We had national news figures bitching, we had people bitching on here, we had people bitching all over. Just like ALL the other times we've helped another nation.

What's really great is that when we do, we can't rush fast enough to piss all over our own shoes about how we're so high and benevolent. World War II comes to mind, where we continue to fap about how "we saved all yer asses!" Yeah, we did. But we can also shut the fuck up about it, because it just makes us look like arrogant children.

In other words, after we help Haiti, we'll just inflate our own egos some more, despite the fact that THE WHOLE TIME WE'RE HELPING, we've got a huge contingent of people bitching about it.

We do our share of "helping" low income people. There is a point in which certain people do not want to excel in their lives and are comfortable where they are however depressing it may be to us. People have to make a choice to succeed you cannot force them with free money. It just doesn't work.
Click to expand...

This has zero to do with anything, and is just your usual Republican puffery disguised as an argument, when it's little more than tangential anecdotal nothing.

Your responses depressing.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Try reading the whole thing.

It is the least you can do.



Depends on what you mean by competition, insurance companies previously competed by racing to see who could exclude as many unprofitable people as possible for the purposes of profit and executive pay.

Now hopefully they will compete to offer the best bang for the buck for consumers, aka us.

And as for the cost controls by eliminating pre-existing conditions you won't have what is basically an entire layer of bureaucracy devoted to denying people care and trying to ferret out the sick.[/QUOTE]

I read the whole thing jackass, figured I would take it point by point.

Tell me why they will compete to offer the "best bang for the buck for consumers"? These companies will be required to take on anybody, which means people who are sick are going to sign up for insurance, and the insurance company will have to pay the huge health care costs we didn't reduce. So how again will this part lower costs?
 
[quote name='Strell']Piss off. You said "Did America complain when we helped Haiti? No." And that is absolutely untrue. Don't make an untrue statement and then backpedal when it can be easily demonstrated it's false. We had national news figures bitching, we had people bitching on here, we had people bitching all over. Just like ALL the other times we've helped another nation.



This has zero to do with anything, and is just your usual Republican puffery disguised as an argument, when it's little more than tangential anecdotal nothing.

Your responses depressing.[/QUOTE]

Did we still help Haiti? thought so.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Did we still help Haiti? thought so.[/QUOTE]

Keep moving that goal post, since that wasn't your damned proposal to begin with.

fuckin' miserable.

I again ask for a forum wide ignore for this joker. Legit retarded nonsense out of his mouth is going to give us all the stupid.
 
[quote name='Strell']Keep moving that goal post, since that wasn't your damned proposal to begin with.

fuckin' miserable.

I again ask for a forum wide ignore for this joker. Legit retarded nonsense out of his mouth is going to give us all the stupid.[/QUOTE]

Lol, people complained we were getting involved with world war 2, I did not mean noone complained, what I did mean is that the majority (which is the amount that matters in case you didn't know) of America wanted to help Haiti.

Stop distorting my posts douchebag.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Now they should be able to buy insurance, I don't want to repeat myself but there is the carrot of subsidies and the stick of the mandate (as long as people don't go and spoil it by pointing out it is relatively toothless).[/QUOTE]

Theres no question that they will be able to afford it, but will they gives up their "wants" for their "needs"? I hope so.

I couldn't agree more regarding the other government expenditures that should take a back seat to healthcare (space exploration). Okay, maybe I got that one from Geoff Tate.
 
[quote name='Knoell']I read the whole thing jackass, figured I would take it point by point.[/quote]

Then go ahead and take it point by point.

Assuming you aren't that lazy or just lying.

Tell me why they will compete to offer the "best bang for the buck for consumers"?
Click to expand...

Because if they try to go back to old tricks they won't get listed on the new health exchanges.

So how again will this part lower costs?
Click to expand...

You are mistaken if you think sick people or covering them are the only things that have to do with why we spend so much on healthcare in this country.

Like I said before other countries cover all their sick people for much less than we do.

You would know this if you weren't so lazy.
 
[quote name='xxDOYLExx']Theres no question that they will be able to afford it, but will they gives up their "wants" for their "needs"? I hope so.[/quote]

A lot of the people you are talking about will be covered (if they weren't already covered) by the medicaid expansion and a lot of the people above that band will have an almost total subsidy, presumably the remaining dodgers would be people who are (or believe themselves to be) preternaturally able to determine the optimal amount of sickness before they enroll in a plan or are just wanting to stick it to the ebil gubberment and fartbama.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Then go ahead and take it point by point.

Assuming you aren't that lazy or just lying.



Because if they try to go back to old tricks they won't get listed on the new health exchanges.



You are mistaken if you think sick people or covering them are the only things that have to do with why we spend so much on healthcare in this country.

Like I said before other countries cover all their sick people for much less than we do.

You would know this if you weren't so lazy.[/QUOTE]

So you think that the health insurance companies make health care cost so much?
 
[quote name='Knoell']So you think that the health insurance companies make health care cost so much?[/QUOTE]

The health insurance companies as they are now and especially pre-reform?

Short answer, yes.

Long answer, hell yes.
 
[quote name='Msut77']A lot of the people you are talking about will be covered (if they weren't already covered) by the medicaid expansion and a lot of the people above that band will have an almost total subsidy, presumably the remaining dodgers would be people who are (or believe themselves to be) preternaturally able to determine the optimal amount of sickness before they enroll in a plan or are just wanting to stick it to the ebil gubberment and fartbama.[/QUOTE]

So only the poor people are the ones who were getting screwed by insurers before? What does this do for people in the middle class?
 
[quote name='Msut77']The health insurance companies as they are now and especially pre-reform?

Short answer, yes.

Long answer, hell yes.[/QUOTE]

Insurance companies have to pay those high health care bills as well. I am talking about these medical procedures that are costing tens of thousands of dollars. The insurance company pays these out all the time, don't you think if they controlled those costs they would make them lower to increase profit?
 
fartbama? Did you coin that? Maybe its still too early for me but that crap is funny. :lol:

Are there any other sites besides the ones you have mentioned in this thread that you go to get the dope on healthcare reform?
 
[quote name='xxDOYLExx']fartbama? Did you coin that? Maybe its still too early for me but that crap is funny.[/quote]

I heard it somewhere, I think it was from someone making fun of the teabonics crowd.

Are there any other sites besides the ones you have mentioned in this thread that you go to get the dope on healthcare reform?
Click to expand...

Ezra Klein who I linked did some real yeoman's work, Krugman had some really good opinion pieces and blog postings as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Knoell']Insurance companies have to pay those high health care bills as well.[/QUOTE]

Technically we pay those high healthcare bills outright or in reduced wages, what insurance companies do is skim off the top of money going from us to actual healthcare providers.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Technically we pay those high healthcare bills outright or in reduced wages, what insurance companies do is skim off the top of money going from us to actual healthcare providers.[/QUOTE]

So you are saying insurers pay nothing, but actually take money off the top from individuals paying these twenty thousand dollar bills?

I have a hard time believing that insurers pay nothing.
 
[quote name='Knoell']So you are saying insurers pay nothing, but actually take money off the top from individuals paying these twenty thousand dollar bills?

I have a hard time believing that insurers pay nothing.[/QUOTE]

Some of it is due to profit and bonuses etc. like I said before then a lot of the reason we spend so much is due to things like these insurance companies and their several thousand different types of payment and reimbursement plans from having such a fractured system and a host of other things such as advertising and bribing congress.

Do you know how health care works in other countries?

Say Germany for example?
 
[quote name='Msut77']Some of it is due to profit and bonuses etc. like I said before then a lot of the reason we spend so much is due to things like these insurance companies and their several thousand different types of payment and reimbursement plans from having such a fractured system and a host of other things such as advertising and bribing congress.

Do you know how health care works in other countries?

Say Germany for example?[/QUOTE]

I simply do not believe the reason health care costs are so high is solely because of insurance companies. The insurance companies DO pay out hundreds of millions of dollars a year to the insured. For you to say they don't and just keep the money for profit is simply false.

My dental for example. I just had to go to the dentist to get a lot of work done. I have dental insurance. Out of the $2400 dollar bill, my insurer paid $2000. Sure I paid $400, but I am not going to blame the insurer for that, I am going to blame the high cost of dentistry.

Insurers may raise premiums but they do not directly control the cost of the procedures.

Edit: I forgot about Germany. Germany technically does it very well. We are not moving in the direction of Germany. Our officials believe that a monopoly must be offered in order to efficiently offer health insurance for all, and they waste their time taxing plans that offer better coverage aka the cadillac tax. The system we are moving towards is nothing like Germanys
 
[quote name='Knoell']I simply do not believe the reason health care costs are so high is solely because of insurance companies. The insurance companies DO pay out hundreds of millions of dollars a year to the insured. For you to say they don't and just keep the money for profit is simply false.

My dental for example. I just had to go to the dentist to get a lot of work done. I have dental insurance. Out of the $2400 dollar bill, my insurer paid $2000. Sure I paid $400, but I am not going to blame the insurer for that, I am going to blame the high cost of dentistry.

Insurers may raise premiums but they do not directly control the cost of the procedures.[/QUOTE]

How does your insurer stay in business if they lost $2000 on you? Are they a charity?
 
[quote name='Knoell']Insurers may raise premiums but they do not directly control the cost of the procedures.[/QUOTE]

for better or worse, they actually do.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']How does your insurer stay in business if they lost $2000 on you? Are they a charity?[/QUOTE]

I pay a premium, and my work also pays into it.
 
[quote name='Knoell']I pay a premium, and my work also pays into it.[/QUOTE]

Do you have an idea of how much money you and your company have paid into your dental policy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top