http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091108/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul;_ylt=ApMT5H_PZ7JiN2CpMU3iIfSs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTM1cGdtZWh1BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMTA4L3VzX2hlYWx0aF9jYXJlX292ZXJoYXVsBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMgRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDaG91c2VuYXJyb3ds
Yay happydood;
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/07/gop-gone-wild/
i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object
And title, this is why we laugh at republicans. They act like 5 year olds.
I think it's ironic that it passed on the 92nd anniversary of the 1917 October Revolution.
baddood;
Quote from: Jet Black Wii on November 07, 2009, 03:28:48 PM
I think it's ironic that it passed on the 92nd anniversary of the 1917 October Revolution.
baddood;
i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object
Quote from: JMV on November 07, 2009, 03:29:53 PM
i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object
to your post, i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object
Quote from: JMV on November 07, 2009, 03:23:48 PM
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/07/gop-gone-wild/
i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object i object
And title, this is why we laugh at republicans. They act like 5 year olds.
Jeez and these are some of the people that make decisions on laws and stuff for our country baddood; it is rather scary
huh
i pay no attention to politics tell me what this means
"this is well beyond "politican power grabs"
this is the handle on FREEDOM in America..
dont think your guns are safe
dont think your swiming pool is safe, or lawn mower or dishwasher..
they are going to use cooked statistics to Tax, Take away, and CONTROL your LIVES. INCLUDING
how you RAISE YOUR CHILDRAN IN YOUR HOME"
No one has a "right" to quality healthcare regardless of ability to pay. That's like saying everyone has a right to a car, or a house, or a computer even if they can't afford it. Healthcare is a business providing goods and services â,“ the federal government has no right to dictate that all Americans must purchase a specific good or service or face legal ramifications. Nor do they have the right to dictate to private corporations how they run their business, slimy as the corporations may be.
As much as I think healthcare needs to be fixed, this bill isn't the way to do it. I hope the Senate kills it.
Quote from: Kevin on November 09, 2009, 10:46:47 AM
No one has a "right" to quality healthcare regardless of ability to pay. That's like saying everyone has a right to a car, or a house, or a computer even if they can't afford it. Healthcare is a business providing goods and services â,“ the federal government has no right to dictate that all Americans must purchase a specific good or service or face legal ramifications. Nor do they have the right to dictate to private corporations how they run their business, slimy as the corporations may be.
As much as I think healthcare needs to be fixed, this bill isn't the way to do it. I hope the Senate kills it.
You know, I honestly hope you test positive for some pre-existing condition so you can watch your insurance company drop you faster than you can say 'I object'. ;)
Though, if this isn't the way to fix it, how should we go about fixing it? In before you say 'DROP ALL REGULATIONS AND LET THE FREE MARKET DECIDE IF YOU DESERVE THAT KIDNEY'.
Quote from: ДавиÌд on November 09, 2009, 11:09:22 AM
You know, I honestly hope you test positive for some pre-existing condition so you can watch your insurance company drop you faster than you can say 'I object'. ;)
Though, if this isn't the way to fix it, how should we go about fixing it? In before you say 'DROP ALL REGULATIONS AND LET THE FREE MARKET DECIDE IF YOU DESERVE THAT KIDNEY'.
We shouldn't make a 1.2 trillion dollar bill while we're in a deficit. Maybe we should focus more on fixing the economy before we set ourselves up to fail again. This bill will raise taxes. When the taxes are raised, it will create a bigger gap between the upper and lower classes; you have the lower classes that can't afford the classes and the higher class that can. This creates a gap as exemplified by China.
Quote from: j o e i n c on November 09, 2009, 11:28:25 AM
It shouldn't be.
I'm not debating on if it should be or not, just that it is.
Quote from: Kevin on November 09, 2009, 11:32:19 AM
We shouldn't make a 1.2 trillion dollar bill while we're in a deficit. Maybe we should focus more on fixing the economy before we set ourselves up to fail again.
Because sick people are completely capable of working.
QuoteThis bill will raise taxes
How many times have I been over the fact that people are already paying thousands for health insurance?
This bill will reduce the cost of existing insurance and offer a cheaper option for everyone else. The money saved from not paying thousands for insurance will result in a lower overall cost or no change.
QuoteWhen the taxes are raised, it will create a bigger gap between the upper and lower classes; you have the lower classes that can't afford the classes and the higher class that can.
hey isn't that what the public option is for.
thanks for supporting it mippo
QuoteThis creates a gap as exemplified by China.
Capitalistic outsourcing of jobs to nations where minimum wage is much cheaper or non-existent?
OH MY GOD OBAMA IS SENDING OUR DISEASE OVERSEAS. STUPID GOOKS TAKING OUR CANCER
Quote from: JMV on November 09, 2009, 01:08:47 PM
How many times have I been over the fact that people are already paying thousands for health insurance?
This bill will reduce the cost of existing insurance and offer a cheaper option for everyone else. The money saved from not paying thousands for insurance will result in a lower overall cost or no change.
hey isn't that what the public option is for.
I heard (although I can't confirm it for certain) that the bill has been crippled so badly (to gain support) that the public option is going to be fairly expensive saddood;
Quote from: Hïro on November 09, 2009, 01:38:40 PM
I heard (although I can't confirm it for certain) that the bill has been crippled so badly (to gain support) that the public option is going to be fairly expensive saddood;
I doubt it.
i don't plan on getting sick
Quote from: JMV on November 09, 2009, 02:47:59 PM
no one does baddood;
my genes are superior to yours
[spoiler]because i don't plan on getting sick[/spoiler]
Quote from: JMV on November 09, 2009, 01:08:47 PM
Because sick people are completely capable of working.
Duh.
QuoteHow many times have I been over the fact that people are already paying thousands for health insurance?
This bill will reduce the cost of existing insurance and offer a cheaper option for everyone else. The money saved from not paying thousands for insurance will result in a lower overall cost or no change.
If there's going to be little to no change in cost then the people who already can't afford it won't be able to afford it. The Republicans fucked this up by trying to put regulations and amendments to the bill and the public option is going to go up in cost.
Quote from: Kevin on November 10, 2009, 07:22:41 AM
Duh.
ru dumb
QuoteIf there's going to be little to no change in cost then the people who already can't afford it won't be able to afford it.
Uh, no.
The public option will be significantly cheaper, and if the person doesn't want to go with the public option they will be able to remain with private insurance, which will either be cheaper even with higher taxes or no change at all. The poor people who already can't afford private insurance will be able to afford the public option
QuoteThe Republicans fucked this up by trying to put regulations and amendments to the bill and the public option is going to go up in cost.
Considering that there is no public option, making the cost 0 of course the cost is going to go up. doodhuh;
But the republicans do fuck everything up because they're worrying about their bonuses from the health insurance companies rather than the health of Americans.
Quote from: JMV on November 10, 2009, 07:48:49 AM
ru dumb
Uh, no.
The public option will be significantly cheaper, and if the person doesn't want to go with the public option they will be able to remain with private insurance, which will either be cheaper even with higher taxes or no change at all. The poor people who already can't afford private insurance will be able to afford the public option
Considering that there is no public option, making the cost 0 of course the cost is going to go up. doodhuh;
But the republicans do fuck everything up because they're worrying about their bonuses from the health insurance companies rather than the health of Americans.
Like Hiro said, the public option will be fairly expensive.
With no source or statement otherwise. I'm almost certain that "lol higher cost" is just more republican bitching in the same vein as "lol death panels".
Quote from: JMV on November 10, 2009, 08:50:06 AM
With no source or statement otherwise. I'm almost certain that "lol higher cost" is just more republican bitching in the same vein as "lol death panels".
"Subsidizing health insurance means that patients and doctors are insulated from the costs of health care, so they utilize too much -- often in the form of unnecessary tests or medical procedures whose value hasn't been proven. This excess demand, along with technological progress, means rapidly growing deficits, so governments limit reimbursements to health providers or ration care. This kills innovation and creates its own inequities. The taxes necessary to fund subsidies are a drag on economic growth." This alone explains the future possbilities for another tax raise or a higher cost in public option.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/10/29/miron.health.care/index.html
Quote from: Kevin on November 10, 2009, 09:38:43 AM
"Subsidizing health insurance means that patients and doctors are insulated from the costs of health care, so they utilize too much -- often in the form of unnecessary tests or medical procedures whose value hasn't been proven. This excess demand, along with technological progress, means rapidly growing deficits, so governments limit reimbursements to health providers or ration care. This kills innovation and creates its own inequities. The taxes necessary to fund subsidies are a drag on economic growth." This alone explains the future possbilities for another tax raise or a higher cost in public option.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/10/29/miron.health.care/index.html
You're linking to an
editorial from a Libertarian. doodhuh;
QuoteGovernment should not subsidize health insurance -- for the uninsured, the poor, the elderly or anyone else -- or regulate health insurance markets. Here's why.
It then goes into the paragraph you linked to. It provides no citations for any of its figures and claims.
he then continues to just go on 'hurr dur taxes and disproven claims that equality and providing for people kills innovation' when it does not.
and by figures i mean it provides no figures :|
Quote from: JMV on November 10, 2009, 10:13:11 AM
You're linking to an editorial from a Libertarian. doodhuh;
You're saying he was hired as a lecturer at
Harvard on
economics because he has no idea what he's talking about? doodhuh; This editorial holds some weight.
Quote
It then goes into the paragraph you linked to. It provides no citations for any of its figures and claims.
he then continues to just go on 'hurr dur taxes and disproven claims that equality and providing for people kills innovation' when it does not.
Nothing being said here has any citations for any claims. You don't know how this bill will affect America. All we have is a plan of the course that you think this will take, and all we can really do is speculate about the outcome. That's what I'm doing here.
Here Jimv: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/10/30/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5461891.shtml
Once again this isn't entirely 100% sure, but it's a more reliable source baddood;
Quote from: Kevin on November 10, 2009, 10:21:42 AM
You're saying he was hired as a lecturer at Harvard on economics because he has no idea what he's talking about? doodhuh;
Because he's a libertarian who is basically saying 'lol no regulartion free market fuck yeah fuck taxes' when that has failed. They had a chance to not screw people over and look what happened.
Explain how the free market stops every insurance company from working together to fuck over everyone. It doesn't.
It's the FDA--government regulation--that keeps the drug industry in check. Do you really think they give a fuck what the side effects are? No, in fact they'd hope that one is addiction to keep you as a customer.
Mr Taxbaby in your article has said nothing new "lol they will pay taxes hurrrrr" rather than "premiums will be lower so the difference in taxes won't increase".
QuoteThis editorial holds some weight.Nothing being said here has any citations for any claims.
When I'm an "economist" writing an editorial I''ll make sure I do that.
oh there's also the fact that I live in massachusetts which already has a form of this in place so i know first hand. :|
QuoteYou don't know how this bill will affect America. All we have is a plan of the course that you think this will take, and all we can really do is speculate about the outcome. That's what I'm doing here.
we seem do be doing quite fine kthnx
Quote from: Hïro on November 10, 2009, 10:36:24 AM
Here Jimv: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/10/30/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5461891.shtml
Once again this isn't entirely 100% sure, but it's a more reliable source baddood;
huh
By contrast, premiums for a "robust" public option -- one that offered Medicare rates plus 5 percent -- would be cheaper than private plans on the exchange, even taking "adverse selection" into account, according to a recent study by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
"We estimate that the public plan would have costs that were 18 percent below the average level for private plans but that the public plan premiums would be roughly 11 percent lower than private as a result of antiselection enrollees," the CMS wrote.
Quote from: JMV on November 10, 2009, 10:40:14 AMhuh
By contrast, premiums for a "robust" public option -- one that offered Medicare rates plus 5 percent -- would be cheaper than private plans on the exchange, even taking "adverse selection" into account, according to a recent study by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
"We estimate that the public plan would have costs that were 18 percent below the average level for private plans but that the public plan premiums would be roughly 11 percent lower than private as a result of antiselection enrollees," the CMS wrote.
right on?
Quote from: Hïro on November 10, 2009, 10:44:40 AM
right on?
uh i was quoting the article you linked me to...
it says the costs are lower akudood;
what do you mean "right on?" with a sarcastic tone did you read the article?
i don't get sick because i don't plan on getting sick
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091110/ap_on_he_me/med_unproven_remedies_placebo
Quote from: JMV on November 10, 2009, 11:08:24 AM
uh i was quoting the article you linked me to...
it says the costs are lower akudood;
what do you mean "right on?" with a sarcastic tone did you read the article?
I meant right on as in "good job". I don't see what else it could mean doodhuh;
And I wasn't sarcastic either
To be honest I just skimmed over the article.
It was never my intention to argue with you over this, I support the public option too.
Quotewith a sarcastic tone did you read the article?
yoda?
don't link to something if you don't read it akudood;
Quote from: Socks on November 10, 2009, 11:08:57 AM
i don't get sick because i don't plan on getting sick
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091110/ap_on_he_me/med_unproven_remedies_placebo
lol new age medicine akudood;
also i didn't use a period. it was 2 sentences nigger
Quote from: JMV on November 10, 2009, 11:13:56 AM
don't link to something if you don't read it akudood;
i skimmed it, but I don't really care. You found good info out of it, so I'm fine.
I didn't bring it up as an argument, just a topic of discussion
Quote from: JMV on November 10, 2009, 11:15:31 AM
also i didn't use a period. it was 2 sentences nigger
wut doodhuh;
Quote from: JMV on November 10, 2009, 11:13:56 AM
lol new age medicine akudood;
which is really timeless medicine THE POWER OF GOD
I hope you've lubed up, taxpayers!
Quote from: Title on November 11, 2009, 05:44:37 AM
I hope you've lubed up, taxpayers!
i think americans are used to be fucked in the ass without lube.
i mean look at our current healthcare system
Quote from: JMV on November 11, 2009, 05:46:52 AM
i think americans are used to be fucked in the ass without lube.
i mean look at our current healthcare system
Those aren't americans, those are homeless people.
and all of the people who have gotten colonoscopies.
Quote from: RDX on November 11, 2009, 07:36:40 AM
and all of the people who have gotten colonoscopies.
good one faggot
I don't understand the logic of saying that we can give higher-quality care to more people for less money.
Quote from: Zach on November 11, 2009, 08:45:02 AM
I don't understand the logic of saying that we can give higher-quality care to more people for less money.
We can't. The bill is 1.2 trillion dollars. That's going to raise taxes signifigantly. If it raises them slightly, then who knows the prolonged window of time that it will take to pay it off. Not to mention we're in debt as fuck as it is. Besides that, the people are still having to pay for the public option; whether it be expensive or not, they're only paying for the service. Not the initial cost of the bill. Maybe we should use money from the continued taxes that have already paid the bill they were intended to pay years ago.
Quote from: Zach on November 11, 2009, 08:45:02 AM
I don't understand the logic of saying that we can give higher-quality care to more people for less money.
Inflated costs between the health insurance companies and doctors.
We're 17th or something in quality of healthcare and yet we spend the most.
Quote from: Kevin on November 11, 2009, 09:20:10 AM
We can't. The bill is 1.2 trillion dollars. That's going to raise taxes signifigantly. If it raises them slightly, then who knows the prolonged window of time that it will take to pay it off. Not to mention we're in debt as fuck as it is. Besides that, the people are still having to pay for the public option; whether it be expensive or not, they're only paying for the service. Not the initial cost of the bill. Maybe we should use money from the continued taxes that have already paid the bill they were intended to pay years ago.
Stop talking.
Quote from: Zach on November 11, 2009, 08:45:02 AM
I don't understand the logic of saying that we can give higher-quality care to more people for less money.
Quote from: JMV on November 11, 2009, 10:40:20 AM
Inflated costs between the health insurance companies and doctors.
We're 17th or something in quality of healthcare and yet we spend the most.
this, and any health care is better than no health care