 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Economy Forum » Yet another way "public option" hurts the economy... |
|
Page 2 of 3 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Rod Speed... |
 Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:54 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
AZDuffman wrote
[quote]hal wrote
AZDuffman <srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote
hal wrote
AZDuffman <srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote
It is hard to dispute that Americans do not want the public option
That's a lie, all the polls show distinct majorities approve of it.
If that was the case congress would be rushing to pass it.
In reality, most "polls" that say people favor it are skewed
to democrats and people who do not know what it really is.
Another lie, clearly the people who do not know what it
is are those who are against it based on the number of
lies they are throwing around, you know, just like you.
Not really.
[/quote]
Yes, really.
[quote]When people hear the truth--that it is a government
run money-pit that will raise their taxes, reduce choice,
[/quote]
Another lie. You are free to keep using what you are happy with, and get MORE
choice when there is a govt alternative added, you silly little pathological liar.
[quote]and start the path to "single payer"
[/quote]
Another lie. Even medicare didnt do that, you silly little pathological liar.
[quote]they realize what a bad idea it is.
[/quote]
Another lie. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:09 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:43:48 -0700 (PDT), AZDuffman
<srduffy1126 at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 29, 3:56=A0pm, hal wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:36:17 -0700 (PDT), AZDuffman
srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 29, 1:38=3DA0pm, hal wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:08:37 -0700 (PDT), AZDuffman
srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
It is hard to dispute that Americans do not want the public option
That's a lie, all the polls show distinct majorities approve of it.
If that was the case congress would be rushing to pass it. =A0In
reality, most "polls" that say people favor it are skewed to democrats
and people who do not know what it really is.
Another lie, clearly the people who do not know what it is are those
who are against it based on the number of lies they are throwing
around, you know, just like you.
Not really. When people hear the truth--that it is a government run
money-pit that will raise their taxes, reduce choice, and start the
path to "single payer" they realize what a bad idea it is.
for some reason that clearly escapes you every developed[/quote]
industrialized country in the world has socialized medicine and they
all rate better health care systems than we do. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| squirlchatr... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:13 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
AZDuffman wrote:
[quote]On Oct 29, 1:38 pm, hal wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:08:37 -0700 (PDT), AZDuffman
srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
It is hard to dispute that Americans do not want the public option
That's a lie, all the polls show distinct majorities approve of it.
If that was the case congress would be rushing to pass it. In
reality, most "polls" that say people favor it are skewed to democrats
and people who do not know what it really is.
Hopefully the filibuster lasts long enough to kill the whole thing.
80%+ are happy with their current plan.
[/quote]
Like those peopleSCREAMING about thisdeal that have no insurance
whatsoever, hmm, yeaa, right.
Like those peeple SCREAMING DOWN Democrats at town hall meetings
SCREAMING OUT QUESTIONS that they have no interests whatsoever of
getting an answer to.
fuck you people, you are completely useless to American politics. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| squirlchatr... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:31 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
AZDuffman wrote:
[quote]On Oct 29, 3:56 pm, hal wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:36:17 -0700 (PDT), AZDuffman
srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 29, 1:38=A0pm, hal wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:08:37 -0700 (PDT), AZDuffman
srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
It is hard to dispute that Americans do not want the public option
That's a lie, all the polls show distinct majorities approve of it.
If that was the case congress would be rushing to pass it. In
reality, most "polls" that say people favor it are skewed to democrats
and people who do not know what it really is.
Another lie, clearly the people who do not know what it is are those
who are against it based on the number of lies they are throwing
around, you know, just like you.
Not really. When people hear the truth--that it is a government run
money-pit that will raise their taxes, reduce choice, and start the
path to "single payer" they realize what a bad idea it is.
[/quote]
Shit, your Republican 'leadership' cannot even 'explain' who what
where when and why.
Just a bunch of hysterical idiots following their fear mongers. What
do you get out of it?
Really, wgat does the Republican party do for the average, joe the
plumber. <<haha
what a fucking joke. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Econotron... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:50 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"AZDuffman" <srduffy1126 at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a8a9fa00-3ba9-4c16-bb11-52ff052259ef at (no spam) g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 29, 1:38 pm, hal wrote:
[quote]On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:08:37 -0700 (PDT), AZDuffman
srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
It is hard to dispute that Americans do not want the public option
That's a lie, all the polls show distinct majorities approve of it.
[/quote]
If that was the case congress would be rushing to pass it. In
reality, most "polls" that say people favor it are skewed to democrats
and people who do not know what it really is.
Hopefully the filibuster lasts long enough to kill the whole thing.
80%+ are happy with their current plan.
===================================================================
Most people do not understand what public option really is and its long-term
consequences. You can always get widely different results, depending on how
ask the question. If Democrats (since only they can accomplish something
like the following) propose a new government program that makes everybody
young, good looking, and rich, I wonder what the poll results will be.
e. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 6:58 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:11:57 -0700 (PDT), AZDuffman
<srduffy1126 at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]Another lie, clearly the people who do not know what it is are those
who are against it based on the number of lies they are throwing
around, you know, just like you.
Not really. =A0When people hear the truth--that it is a government run
money-pit that will raise their taxes, reduce choice, and start the
path to "single payer" they realize what a bad idea it is.
for some reason that clearly escapes you every developed
industrialized country in the world has socialized medicine and they
all rate better health care systems than we do.- Hide quoted text -
Really? Then why do so many Canadians and others come to the USA for
care?
[/quote]
They don't in any significant numbers. It's a lie. Yet another for
you. Actually, as many if not more Americans go to Europe to get
health care they can't get here.
[quote]
They have CHEAPER systems, ours is still the best. Unless you think
waiting months for an MRI and no incentive for innovation are good
things.
[/quote]
You don't need to wait months for an MRI anywhere. That's another
lie.
[quote]
Good stuff usually costs more.
[/quote]
Unless you can't afford it but still need it anyway.
[quote]
[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| darwinist... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 8:56 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 2:08 am, AZDuffman <srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]It is hard to dispute that Americans do not want the public option
Obama is cramming down our throat. But besides it being iommoral for
government to try to run private companies out of business, here is
another unintended consequence I heard on the radio just today. Hard
to believe no one mentioned it yet.
Insurance companies make a substantial part of their profits on
"float" of money collected but not yet paid out. In very simple
terms, say 100 people pay $100 per month for coverage. That is
$10,000 of premium collected. To keep numbers round, say they get a
rate of return of 12% or 1% per month. That is $100 per month they
are getting.
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS! It is good for shareholeders
(increased profit) and policyholders (allows lower rates) alike.
But suppose that $10,000 is not available for the markets and instead
these people are forced into the public "option" like many will be.
That is $10,000 that can't back a mortgage, buy a stock, buy
commercial paper to finance operations. NOTHING!
Naturally premiums are way more than $100 per month and there are way
more than 100 policyholders. We are talking hundreds of billions of
capital removed from the market.
In an era of very tight money espically, this is crazy.
This is just another in a long list of reasons PUBLIC OPTION IS A BAD,
SOCIALIST IDEA.
[/quote]
If we're talking purely economic effects: can you imagine how much
better off an economy would be if half of its bankruptcies could be
prevented. About 60% of bankruptcies in America are caused by medical
bills.
That's retarded.
Secondly, to prevent people dying on the street outside the hospital,
the law says that emergency rooms in america can't deny someone
treatment, whether or not they've got insurance; whether or not they
can pay. So they get treated and the hospital has to pass the cost on
to paying customers. People who can pay for it, therefore, are paying
for people who can't. They're not just paying more than the people
with no insurance, they're paying for all of the emergency treatment
for the people who can't afford it.
That's a ridiculous caricature of "free market" capitalism.
If these people with no coverage could afford preventative care and
treatment, they might never end up at the emergency room and the total
cost of their care could be a lot lower.
What kind of a system are you sticking up for, exactly?
One that damages the economy by creating bankruptices.
One that overcharges people who can afford to pay, even more than a
socialist system would.
One where people who need healthcare the most find it hardest to get
coverage because of pre-existing conditions.
And why are you sticking up for it? A public option doesn't preclude
free-market competition. There are lots of private insurance companies
here in "bad, socialist" Australia. No could accuse us of lagging
behind in research or innovation, either.
Even if none of the above were true, your original point is still
false. Large government-owned funds (insurance or otherwise) also
invest in the market in order to get a decent rate of return on the
money before it's spent. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Rod Speed... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:35 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
darwinist wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 2:08 am, AZDuffman <srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
It is hard to dispute that Americans do not want the public option
Obama is cramming down our throat. But besides it being iommoral for
government to try to run private companies out of business, here is
another unintended consequence I heard on the radio just today. Hard
to believe no one mentioned it yet.
Insurance companies make a substantial part of their profits on
"float" of money collected but not yet paid out. In very simple
terms, say 100 people pay $100 per month for coverage. That is
$10,000 of premium collected. To keep numbers round, say they get a
rate of return of 12% or 1% per month. That is $100 per month they
are getting.
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS! It is good for shareholeders
(increased profit) and policyholders (allows lower rates) alike.
But suppose that $10,000 is not available for the markets and instead
these people are forced into the public "option" like many will be.
That is $10,000 that can't back a mortgage, buy a stock, buy
commercial paper to finance operations. NOTHING!
Naturally premiums are way more than $100 per month and there are way
more than 100 policyholders. We are talking hundreds of billions of
capital removed from the market.
In an era of very tight money espically, this is crazy.
This is just another in a long list of reasons PUBLIC OPTION IS A
BAD, SOCIALIST IDEA.
If we're talking purely economic effects: can you imagine how much better
off an economy would be if half of its bankruptcies could be prevented.
[/quote]
It would in fact have fuck all effect on the economy.
Even just binning the terminal stupid non recourse system
with housing loans would have a MUCH bigger effect.
[quote]About 60% of bankruptcies in America are caused by medical bills.
[/quote]
Yes, and its by far the biggest personal bankruptcys too.
[quote]That's retarded.
[/quote]
It is indeed. Particularly when its so easily avoided.
[quote]Secondly, to prevent people dying on the street outside the hospital,
the law says that emergency rooms in america can't deny someone
treatment, whether or not they've got insurance; whether or not they
can pay. So they get treated and the hospital has to pass the cost on
to paying customers. People who can pay for it, therefore, are paying
for people who can't. They're not just paying more than the people
with no insurance, they're paying for all of the emergency treatment
for the people who can't afford it.
[/quote]
Correct.
[quote]That's a ridiculous caricature of "free market" capitalism.
[/quote]
Its more the result of the terminally stupid approach that
Congress took of mandating that they must all be treated,
but completely ignoring how that treatment is paid for.
[quote]If these people with no coverage could afford preventative
care and treatment, they might never end up at the emergency
room and the total cost of their care could be a lot lower.
[/quote]
That last is very arguable.
[quote]What kind of a system are you sticking up for, exactly?
One that damages the economy by creating bankruptices.
[/quote]
Only marginally.
[quote]One that overcharges people who can afford to
pay, even more than a socialist system would.
One where people who need healthcare the most find it
hardest to get coverage because of pre-existing conditions.
And why are you sticking up for it?
[/quote]
Because he is a terminal fuckwit/pathological liar.
There will always be plenty of those opposed to any decent health care funding system.
[quote]A public option doesn't preclude free-market competition.
[/quote]
And thats where he's just a pathological liar.
[quote]There are lots of private insurance companies here in "bad, socialist" Australia.
[/quote]
There are indeed.
[quote]No could accuse us of lagging behind in research or innovation, either.
[/quote]
Indeed.
[quote]Even if none of the above were true, your original point is still false.
[/quote]
Yep.
[quote]Large government-owned funds (insurance or otherwise) also invest in the
market in order to get a decent rate of return on the money before it's spent.
[/quote]
Yep. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| AZDuffman... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 5:32 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 29, 8:58 pm, hal wrote:
[quote]On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:11:57 -0700 (PDT), AZDuffman
srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Another lie, clearly the people who do not know what it is are those
who are against it based on the number of lies they are throwing
around, you know, just like you.
Not really. =A0When people hear the truth--that it is a government run
money-pit that will raise their taxes, reduce choice, and start the
path to "single payer" they realize what a bad idea it is.
for some reason that clearly escapes you every developed
industrialized country in the world has socialized medicine and they
all rate better health care systems than we do.- Hide quoted text -
Really? Then why do so many Canadians and others come to the USA for
care?
They don't in any significant numbers. It's a lie. Yet another for
you. Actually, as many if not more Americans go to Europe to get
health care they can't get here.
They have CHEAPER systems, ours is still the best. Unless you think
waiting months for an MRI and no incentive for innovation are good
things.
You don't need to wait months for an MRI anywhere. That's another
lie.
[/quote]
Here is an article on wait times in Canada. Best is 15 weeks. NO
THANKS-NO PUBLIC OPTION!
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/10/15/waittimes-fraser.html |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| tg... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:43 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 11:32 am, AZDuffman <srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 29, 8:58 pm, hal wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:11:57 -0700 (PDT), AZDuffman
srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Another lie, clearly the people who do not know what it is are those
who are against it based on the number of lies they are throwing
around, you know, just like you.
Not really. =A0When people hear the truth--that it is a government run
money-pit that will raise their taxes, reduce choice, and start the
path to "single payer" they realize what a bad idea it is.
for some reason that clearly escapes you every developed
industrialized country in the world has socialized medicine and they
all rate better health care systems than we do.- Hide quoted text -
Really? Then why do so many Canadians and others come to the USA for
care?
They don't in any significant numbers. It's a lie. Yet another for
you. Actually, as many if not more Americans go to Europe to get
health care they can't get here.
They have CHEAPER systems, ours is still the best. Unless you think
waiting months for an MRI and no incentive for innovation are good
things.
You don't need to wait months for an MRI anywhere. That's another
lie.
Here is an article on wait times in Canada. Best is 15 weeks. NO
THANKS-NO PUBLIC OPTION!
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/10/15/waittimes-fraser.html
[/quote]
Do you have some data on waiting times for people who can't get
treatment because they don't have insurance?
-tg |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| AZDuffman... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:50 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 12:43 pm, tg <tgdenn... at (no spam) earthlink.net> wrote:
[quote]Here is an article on wait times in Canada. Best is 15 weeks. NO
THANKS-NO PUBLIC OPTION!
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/10/15/waittimes-fraser.html
Do you have some data on waiting times for people who can't get
treatment because they don't have insurance?
[/quote]
There is no "waiting time" beacause you don't have insurance. If you
can pay you can be treated right away. If it is an emergency they are
required to treat you.
If you want insurance JUST BUY IT. I mean, that is a big part of
Obamacare anyways. And we can do that without a public option most
people don't want when they know what it really means. And without
the immorality of a governmnet trying to run private companies out of
business. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| tg... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:58 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 12:50 pm, AZDuffman <srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 12:43 pm, tg <tgdenn... at (no spam) earthlink.net> wrote:
Here is an article on wait times in Canada. Best is 15 weeks. NO
THANKS-NO PUBLIC OPTION!
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/10/15/waittimes-fraser.html
Do you have some data on waiting times for people who can't get
treatment because they don't have insurance?
There is no "waiting time" beacause you don't have insurance. If you
can pay you can be treated right away. If it is an emergency they are
required to treat you.
[/quote]
But if you are comparing waiting times, you have to compare waiting
times for everyone. So the US would have 'infinite' waiting times,
once you average it out. Well, maybe not infinite, since those people
will just die, but the point is the same.
On the other hand, for Canadian waiting times, you would have to
include those Canadians who don't use the system.
-tg
[quote]
If you want insurance JUST BUY IT. I mean, that is a big part of
Obamacare anyways. And we can do that without a public option most
people don't want when they know what it really means. And without
the immorality of a governmnet trying to run private companies out of
business.[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| AZDuffman... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:35 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 12:58 pm, tg <tgdenn... at (no spam) earthlink.net> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 12:50 pm, AZDuffman <srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 12:43 pm, tg <tgdenn... at (no spam) earthlink.net> wrote:
Here is an article on wait times in Canada. Best is 15 weeks. NO
THANKS-NO PUBLIC OPTION!
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/10/15/waittimes-fraser.html
Do you have some data on waiting times for people who can't get
treatment because they don't have insurance?
There is no "waiting time" beacause you don't have insurance. If you
can pay you can be treated right away. If it is an emergency they are
required to treat you.
But if you are comparing waiting times, you have to compare waiting
times for everyone. So the US would have 'infinite' waiting times,
once you average it out. Well, maybe not infinite, since those people
will just die, but the point is the same.
[/quote]
That isn't a valid comaprison. By your logic I have an "infinate
waiting time" to by a a Cadillac. But it is no waiting time, I just
ened the cash and I could buy it. (even though I'll never buy
Government Motors but I digress.)
See, here is what will happen. When yousocialize medicine the 95% of
the population that is covered by choice will have to wait. And wait,
and wait. Innovation will stop with no more profit motive.
But hey, waiting months and no more medical progress is worth is just
so insurance companies don't "make profit" right????
Like Obama said in his speech--YOU CAN BUY INSURNACE! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| AZDuffman... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:55 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 1:48 pm, Michael Coburn <mik... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]Not really. =A0When people hear the truth--that it is a government
run money-pit that will raise their taxes, reduce choice, and start
the path to "single payer" they realize what a bad idea it is.
Just repeat the lie;
[/quote]
No, I'm telling the truth. ANd example of repeating a lie would be
"Al Gore really won the 2000 election." Saying people don't want a
public option is reality.
[quote]Lie big, Lie early, Lie often
for some reason that clearly escapes you every developed
industrialized country in the world has socialized medicine and they
all rate better health care systems than we do.- Hide quoted text -
Then retain the headline and change the subject and fall for whatever lie
is wrapped in the false headline. The public option is not socialized
medicine yet the comment above allows the rightarded lying sacks of shit
claim that it is.
[/quote]
Lets see, the governent deciding on medical decisions including prices
and what you are allowed to receive in treatment. Yup, socialized
medicine.
Also it is immoral for a government to try to run privat companies out
of business.
Balance snipped because talking to Michael Coburn is like talking to
the wall, except the wall isn't a marxist. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Michael Coburn... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:48 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:32:37 -0700, AZDuffman wrote:
[quote]On Oct 29, 8:58Â pm, hal wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:11:57 -0700 (PDT), AZDuffman
srduffy1... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Another lie, clearly the people who do not know what it is are
those who are against it based on the number of lies they are
throwing around, you know, just like you.
Not really. =A0When people hear the truth--that it is a government
run money-pit that will raise their taxes, reduce choice, and start
the path to "single payer" they realize what a bad idea it is.
[/quote]
Just repeat the lie;
Lie big, Lie early, Lie often
[quote]for some reason that clearly escapes you every developed
industrialized country in the world has socialized medicine and they
all rate better health care systems than we do.- Hide quoted text -
[/quote]
Then retain the headline and change the subject and fall for whatever lie
is wrapped in the false headline. The public option is not socialized
medicine yet the comment above allows the rightarded lying sacks of shit
claim that it is.
[quote]Really? Â Then why do so many Canadians and others come to the USA for
care?
[/quote]
And the debate over a NON ISSUE continues under the false headline.
[quote]They don't in any significant numbers. Â It's a lie. Â Yet another for
you. Â Actually, Â as many if not more Americans go to Europe to get
health care they can't get here.
[/quote]
Yet another discussion that is totally off topic. To the original subject
line and which has nothing to do with the proposed public option.
[quote]They have CHEAPER systems, ours is still the best. Â Unless you think
waiting months for an MRI and no incentive for innovation are good
things.
You don't need to wait months for an MRI anywhere. Â That's another lie.
Here is an article on wait times in Canada. Best is 15 weeks. NO
THANKS-NO PUBLIC OPTION!
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/10/15/waittimes-fraser.html
[/quote]
This entire discussion is horse crap because the Public Option does
absolutely nothing to stop people from buying insurance outside the
public option or paying directly for services. And the Subject was "Re:
Yet another way "public option" hurts the economy"
It is simply a way to have a lying pig headline broadcast across Usenet
as spam.
--
"Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Nov 29, 2009 2:46 am
|
|