|
|
| Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better (465079) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 5 of 7 |
||
|
| (465750) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by bmtlines on Tue Jun 23 09:37:23 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by LuchAAA on Tue Jun 23 01:47:35 2009. It's a shame that health benefits will be taxed.If that happens then I will be forced to DROP my health insurance. I cannot afford to pay tax on anything that I do not receive in cash in order to pay the tax from. |
|
|
| (465757) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Tue Jun 23 10:31:44 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by AlM on Tue Jun 23 08:36:17 2009. Whatever.You pay fed, city, and state. Someone with a decent salary, but not rich, is probably paying 50% in taxes total if they live in NYC. That's enough. Obama and Paterson want to raise them. |
|
|
| (465760) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by bmtlines on Tue Jun 23 10:36:07 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by BMTLines on Tue Jun 23 08:38:50 2009. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
|
|
| (465781) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 11:06:33 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jun 23 07:20:51 2009. I wouldn't know, as the link doesn't work.Fixed link. The 72% figure came from a New York Times/CBS News poll of 895 adults nationwide. The poll also says while 77% are happy with the care they're getting now, 85% see the need to fundamentally change the health care system. |
|
|
| (465786) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jun 23 11:21:38 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by LuchAAA on Tue Jun 23 10:31:44 2009. Someone with a decent salary, but not rich, is probably paying 50% in taxes total if they live in NYC.False. On the top dollar, if below but close to the social security wage base of 106,800: 25% federal 6.85% state 3.5% NYC 7.65% FICA If well above the social security wage base: 33% federal 6.85% state 3.5% NYC 1.45% Medicare And that's on the top dollar. The average is considerably lower. |
|
|
| (465789) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Tue Jun 23 11:37:13 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by AlM on Tue Jun 23 11:21:38 2009. I think it's 28% at that salary. Still too much.And what about someone making over $200,000? Who the hell wants to work hard to give 50% to the government? Might as well be a slacker, earn less, and take home a comparable amount. Might as well take a civil service exam, instead of wasting $100,000 on an education, only to pay 50% in taxes. I can't wait to see the 2010 tax schedule. |
|
|
| (465790) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jun 23 11:43:57 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 11:06:33 2009. Ahhh yes, the NY Times poll, just as I figured, that's why I asked....That same survey also asked "who did you vote for in 2008 election", and 48% were Obama voters, but only 25% were McCain voters. Funny considering 52% of the country voted for Obama, and McCain got about 47% of the vote. Not a very good sample they chose there.....  You can see the full survey of the NY Times here, not just the talking points: http://documents.nytimes.com/latest-new-york-times-cbs-news-poll-on-health#p=7 |
|
|
| (465798) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jun 23 12:01:49 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by LuchAAA on Tue Jun 23 11:37:13 2009. Who the hell wants to work hard to give 50% to the government?They don't. Didn't you read what I just posted? I also didn't take into account the deductibility of state and local taxes from federal. |
|
|
| (465799) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 12:02:02 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jun 22 19:02:39 2009. All I know is that I have been in many "city" run hospital emergency rooms, and in many private hospital emergency rooms over the years with various relatives and friends and occasionally for a personal issue. You are lucky you don't drop dead in many of the public city run hospital emergency rooms. It's night and day comparing it to most private hospitals.Maybe in New York. In other places I've found that care is worse at private for-profit hospitals because they have to turn a profit; the public facilities get a subsidy and are able to provide better care. |
|
|
| (465829) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by David Fairthorne on Tue Jun 23 13:02:47 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Easy on Mon Jun 22 16:13:47 2009. Wasn't there some sort of transit race ... that you were part of where a few people tried to reach a destination using different transit lines?Yes, but I wasn't a contestant, being thousands of miles away. But I seem to remember that Fytton was the last to arrive! |
|
|
| (465832) | |
Re: interstates Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jun 23 13:16:17 2009, in response to Re: interstates Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by AMoreira81 on Sun Jun 21 23:00:11 2009. Because the highway would be taxed via property taxesThat's a bit presumptuous. Just because they did that to the railroads doesn't mean that the highways would be. (I'm surprised that John Mica never, ever campaigns for utterly privatized highways, but is a big champion of the "private sector" building HSR. Funny, ain't it?) |
|
|
| (465837) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 13:29:28 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Fred G on Mon Jun 22 14:13:03 2009. I don't have time to look up, listen to and quote what Obama said right now, so I'm not going to go to the wall over it but just have a funny feeling that he isn't trying to emulate some other countries' single payer system.I did that yesterday, and your suspicion was correct. |
|
|
| (465838) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 13:30:49 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jun 22 12:57:34 2009. Then why wouldn't Gibbs know this?Because the question was "what was Obama referring to," and Gibbs isn't Obama. |
|
|
| (465839) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by David Fairthorne on Tue Jun 23 13:31:16 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by SMAZ on Mon Jun 22 23:32:23 2009. Explaining to people from other countries that Chrysler and GM went bankrupt because of "retiree health care costs" brings stares of disbelief.Yes because in Britain and in Canada, where most essential health care expenses are borne by the taxpayer, company-funded health care is not really essential. However some things that are not covered by the state system, such as dental care, prescription drug costs, and private wards in hospitals, are paid for by some employers. In Britain if you are not happy with the National Health Service you can pay an insurance company for private health care. |
|
|
| (465843) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 13:43:25 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jun 22 21:06:14 2009. There is no doubt that "some" bus companies can make it....Hampton Jitney here in NY being one of them. But then again, they aren't a "necessity" either, and cater more to a higher income/paying crowd. Those people can pack onto the LIRR trains too instead if the Jitney wasn't there, but they pay for the more luxury the Jitney provides.Greyhound is another one...and again, they don't have the infastructure that rail transportation has. But in most places, the alternatives are Greyhound, buying a car, or hitchhiking. There is NO publicly-operated mass transportation. |
|
|
| (465849) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jun 23 14:03:38 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 13:30:49 2009. Gibbs is Obama's representative for the press. |
|
|
| (465851) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jun 23 14:04:59 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 13:43:25 2009. I know, who said there was? Greyhound is national. Saying it's hard to run rapid rail transportation privately implies that most places have it at all? It's a necessity in many areas, but not others. |
|
|
| (465884) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 14:56:02 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jun 23 14:03:38 2009. Gibbs is Obama's representative for the press.Like I said yesterday, the President puts words in the press secretary's mouth, not the other way around. |
|
|
| (465886) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 15:01:30 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jun 23 14:04:59 2009. I know, who said there was? Greyhound is national. Saying it's hard to run rapid rail transportation privately implies that most places have it at all? It's a necessity in many areas, but not others.You said if there was no Hampton Jitney, people could take LIRR instead. It's not the same in most of the country. Using Greyhound as a specific example was bad, too; sometimes your only option is a local private carrier. |
|
|
| (465901) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jun 23 16:14:16 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 15:01:30 2009. It's not the same in most of the country.It's not the same in most of the state! Try getting from NYC to Catskill, NY by public transportation. Catskill is a county seat, it's on a major rail line, and it's on the Thruway. It's a regional center with a Home Depot and other large stores. It's possible to get there from NYC, but it's not pretty. |
|
|
| (465924) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 17:12:53 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by AlM on Tue Jun 23 16:14:16 2009. Try getting from NYC to Catskill, NY by public transportation. Catskill is a county seat, it's on a major rail line, and it's on the Thruway. It's a regional center with a Home Depot and other large stores. It's possible to get there from NYC, but it's not pretty.It looks possible, by taking Amtrak to Columbia County Public Transportation, then a mile long walk across the Rip Van Winkle Bridge to connect with the Rip Van Winkle Express. Not pretty, but possible. |
|
|
| (465928) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jun 23 17:26:26 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 17:12:53 2009. Also bus to Albany, then another bus back to Catskill.NYC to Catskill is probably an extreme example of difficult travel within the Hudson Valley, but probably quite representative of how hard it is to get from point A to point B in most of the country except when they happen to be on the same bus route. |
|
|
| (465929) | |
Re: interstates Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 17:56:25 2009, in response to interstates Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by trainsarefun on Sun Jun 21 22:59:04 2009. A) Whenever I have the option to use a toll road, I always use it. The conditions are fantastic.B) A lot of the roads down here STARTED as toll roads by private entrepreneurs. If it weren't for them, we'd have one small way to cross the bay. Most of the causeways to the beaches were privately built toll roads. You can still go on a private toll bridge on the east coast. I know of one, I'm sure there will be more. So instead of pretending to deal with hypotheticals, I like to deal with actual reality and the past. I think Texas may have one of these I'm not sure. But Australia has some werid thing going on down there in the realm also. |
|
|
| (465931) | |
Re: interstates Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 17:57:29 2009, in response to interstates Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by trainsarefun on Sun Jun 21 22:59:04 2009. In the terms of healthcare.If we did this for toll roads, you mean a private business running the tolls, and instead of you giving money to a certain agency, you want to be taxed and then have the single payer system inflate the costs when paying your toll. That's what we are arguing. |
|
|
| (465932) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 17:58:04 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Fred G on Mon Jun 22 18:49:21 2009. What's a pre-existing condition? |
|
|
| (465933) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 17:59:11 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by SMAZ on Mon Jun 22 23:32:23 2009. You're going to have to explain what you mean. I've never seen a problem with our healthcare.And having the gov't ration is because some bloated union made a big company pay 3x MORE people not to work than to work will get you sent to the mental hospital. |
|
|
| (465934) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 18:00:18 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by David Fairthorne on Tue Jun 23 13:31:16 2009. "National Health Service you can pay an insurance company for private health care. "But not in Canada right? "prescription drug costs" The largest complaint, problem, and failure of those on the USKKKA socialized system now. |
|
|
| (465935) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 18:00:56 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Easy on Mon Jun 22 23:34:22 2009. If you were laid off from Chysler you got $150,000 bucks.If you owned a dealership, you got bankruptcy. |
|
|
| (465936) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 18:01:36 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jun 22 19:53:42 2009. The most damning condemnation of the countries media I've ever heard. |
|
|
| (465938) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 18:02:23 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jun 22 19:02:39 2009. Praise allah I don't think there's a public hospital here for who knows how many hundreds of miles near me. |
|
|
| (465939) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 18:03:12 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by SMAZ on Tue Jun 23 00:53:43 2009. Because most people don't get paid a monthly salary for the rest of their lives to not work? |
|
|
| (465940) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 18:04:00 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by SMAZ on Mon Jun 22 23:39:13 2009. Why not? wouldn't that be a better solution than to pull a fannie mae on the hospitals and make them work for free? |
|
|
| (465941) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jun 23 18:05:51 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jun 22 19:53:42 2009. But it's easy to be opaque to people that have their ears and eyes open and clear? |
|
|
| (465942) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 18:08:24 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by trainsarefun on Sun Jun 21 22:00:20 2009. You made that up. None of those findings are factual at all, and none of those are from a real survey.30% is bullshit It's only too high in NY and the states that have the most regulations. It's expensive to get around the weekly new laws. "2B. There ought not to be a penalty for failing to carry health insurance." Firing squad. With a 3000 dollar bullet fee to support those who have insurance. You have no evidence, like anyone here. You just have conclusions with no stated problems. Because when somethings expensive, I think of the gov't to solve it. You know, we pay probably pennies on the dollar for trash collection here than the taxes you pay up there to do the same, with a quarter of the service? |
|
|
| (465947) | |
Re: interstates Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 18:21:32 2009, in response to Re: interstates Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 17:56:25 2009. Whenever I have the option to use a toll road, I always use it. The conditions are fantastic.You don't pass through Massachusetts or northern Illinois much. |
|
|
| (465948) | |
Re: interstates Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 18:23:54 2009, in response to Re: interstates Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 18:21:32 2009. Nope, and I hope to never will. :pI mean my toll roads. I'd like to see the ones they got in Texas. |
|
|
| (465951) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Tue Jun 23 18:38:24 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 17:58:04 2009. the one you suffer from. Walgreen's opens at 7. be there. |
|
|
| (465952) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 18:49:31 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Fred G on Tue Jun 23 18:38:24 2009. Is that some blue laws in a blue state? There's 24 hour CVS's around.So sad |
|
|
| (465955) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 23 19:01:44 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 18:08:24 2009. You made that up. None of those findings are factual at all, and none of those are from a real survey.Guess that you didn't read the polls run by Wall Street Journal, and by the New York Times. 30% is bullshit I can only aspire to reach the percentage set by you, the master in these parts of such. Look, I like a civil debate. I don't like name calling. If you don't want to engage in it, just don't. Plenty of other stuff here amenable to the usual shtick. It's only too high in NY and the states that have the most regulations. It is indeed expensive in New York. You have no evidence, like anyone here. You just have conclusions with no stated problems. Because when somethings expensive, I think of the gov't to solve it. I am not sure why you are attacking what I posted. I am not in favor of either the President's plan or bipartisan compromise bill. For the reasons that I gave, I don't believe that either plan will succeed in passage. I stand by my points that the cost of healthcare insurance is too high, and that we must first address why this is before launching into the issues now under consideration in DC. If you think that healthcare is affordable, good for you. Most of the country disagrees with you, whether it's deducted from their paychecks, whether they are self-employed and have to buy their own, whether they just can't afford it and also afford life's most pressing needs like food and shelter, or whether they paid all their lives to get into it after they become senior citizens. So perhaps it was a bit complicated for you to follow, so I will help for anyone who has a short-term memory problem, I think that we will first have to address health insurance costs, which means addressing the consensus points 1A [costs too high] and 2A [private insurance administrative overhead too high]. The Democrats' plan attempts to do so via dropping 2B [no penalty for not carrying health insurance] and 4B [private health insurance benefits ought not to be taxed], but in my view this makes their plan politically DOA unless they can show that costs really will decrease substantially. I have not seen that demonstration. I think that the bipartisan compromise bill, the so-called Wyden-Bennett bill (Healthy Americans Act) is also a political non-starter unless it makes a similar demonstration since it also contradicts 2B and 4B; for the uninitiated, it also contradicts 2A [a government sponsored healthcare plan or plans should be offered], which is the main difference with the Democrats' plan. For my own part, I think we should table efforts to reach universal coverage for now, as it's simply too expensive whether via either the state or the private sector. We ought to instead focus on helping those who can afford health insurance have it eat up less of their income and wealth, likely through reform of taxation. I think that health savings accounts (HSAs) are a decent idea, just that they're too puny to deal with the cost of health insurance under present law. In terms of controlling overhead in private insurance plans, that is a more difficult problem. Regulatory reforms may be necessary. Possibly the state should invest in installing more competitive entities in those parts of the country where overhead is a problem that can't be solved by less drastic or intrusive means. Finally, perhaps insurance isn't for everyone. There are a lot of financial wizards out there, some of them now unemployed. Perhaps the present health insurance product for everyone paradigm is incorrect. Maybe people could post bonds in lieu of purchasing catastrophic coverage and those could be traded. Anyway much of it is beyond my ken, but it seems correct to me that the same basic kind of health insurance for everyone is not a good idea, although it is now the one pursued. |
|
|
| (465956) | |
Re: interstates Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jun 23 19:06:29 2009, in response to Re: interstates Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 18:21:32 2009. You don't pass through Massachusetts or northern Illinois much.The Mass Pike may be slow, but it's usually a lot faster than the alternatives. |
|
|
| (465972) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jun 23 20:09:31 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 14:56:02 2009. So then Obama is being purposefully vague. Even worse. |
|
|
| (465974) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Jun 23 20:15:57 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by AlM on Tue Jun 23 08:27:04 2009. You're sounding like a Republican. Nothing in economics works that way. Cut taxes by $1 and the added economic activity doesn't increase taxes by $1, no matter what some people here would say. It only adds a moderate fraction of $1.I didn't mean that extra economic growth would pay for the entire $1 trillion. That would be Republican voodoo economics. I mean that if savings and consolidation of existing expenditures plus the scheduled tax cut expirations would for example pay for let's say 70% of that $1 trillion, then economic growth spurred by an efficient quasi-universal system could take care of the remaining 30%. (I'm using these fictional figures as examples). Republican Voodoo Economic Theory holds that if you you cut taxes on billionaries and Paris Hilton by $1 trillion, the Treasury will magically raise $1.5 trillion in taxes because of new growth. |
|
|
| (465976) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Jun 23 20:23:46 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Fred G on Tue Jun 23 04:35:51 2009. Walter Reed hospital was a fiasco, but that's not the total VA picture.The WRAMC fiasco is a perfect example of privatization ineptitude. The dilapidated out-patient dorm that was the subject of the scandal was privatized by orders of that Great American Genius Donald Rumsfeld when it was still well-run by the Govt. Within a few years the private contractor turned it into a squalid national shame. WRAMC is run by DoD not VA. |
|
|
| (465978) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Tue Jun 23 20:27:40 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by SMAZ on Tue Jun 23 20:23:46 2009. WRAMC is run by DoD not VA.Thanks for the correction. your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (465979) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Tue Jun 23 20:29:52 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 18:49:31 2009. Beats me, I don't use a pharmacy. You seem to have expertise though.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (465980) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Jun 23 20:30:57 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 17:59:11 2009. You're going to have to explain what you mean. I've never seen a problem with our healthcare.WHO World Health Care System Rankings It's only gotten worse since then. |
|
|
| (465987) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jun 23 20:44:17 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jun 23 15:01:30 2009. We were talking about how many types of transportation would be hard to pass a profit if held in private hands. I don't know what you are trying to argue here, I wasn't disagreeing with you. I mentioned the Jitney as a private carrier that was successful, and privately run, and that in an area where there is public transportation, the LIRR. But then I said that was because they had a niche. What you are saying is not untrue, and I never said it wasn't true. But it has nothing to do with the Jitney. |
|
|
| (465995) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 21:08:53 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 23 19:01:44 2009. Ok, point granted. I'm used to dealing with Amoreira's and AIM's.A, I remember the people survey'd for HSA satisfaction was 81%. I forget the general health plan percent, but i remember when you add them up it's closer to 90%. B) We have to remember that health "insurance" isn't like car insurance. First of all, the cost for a claim is higher. Second of all when you work for a company, the big ones aren't even really insurance. They pay for it directly. The "insurance" companies are nothing more than outsourced administrators. Up to lifetime max's anyway if you have one. Fun fact, most people use less than 5000 a year in health costs. Actually I forget the number exactly, it's more like 2-3k but I don't want to lowball it. With that fact out there, you've given the most expensive states #'s with the only state left to even really have HMO's. With NY's regulations, and HMO's, it's the highest profit state in the country for insurance companies. The ones with less regulations and CONSUMER driving plans have razer thin margins. The same as car insurers do. If the average cost per year is going to be 3000, and I spent zero last year, why am I spending 700 a month in a private HMO plan? Who can afford that? OT for a moment, Medicaid. Before my current job I was about to get a gap plan. Looked at several. There are Catasphropic only plans. Such as hospital only plans. Don't always need to pay 700/month for a 75 dollar Urgent clinic visit. I could keep going, but with 30% of the country on national healthcare, and another percentage who wont' even pay for medicaid because they can get it for free instead, I don't see the point. I don't see the need. If it were great it would've worked in Hawaii. For the record, I have an HSA. My place of employment has paid for my Tylenol and flu medicine thanks to the HSA card. I wouldn't recommend it for older people as they don't have the time to save up, but it's ok so far. I think it's a good idea. If your employer contributes. The only issue I don't have any answers for are the people who are self-employed etc. They should have a quasi-something plan. High deductible plans might be good for them. Why spend 1000 a month when you can have a 5000 deductible instead. It's a LOT of money, but if you can afford a grand a month, it'll be cheaper to just deal with the deductible when you need it imo. Other than them, it's a fake issue. The only reason to control the money of the system, instead of the system itself, ie doctors etc, is for corruption and cronyism on a massive scale. People like Obama has a lot of friends and family members that need rewarding. The economy will not come back with 4/gallon gasoline just because we decided to tax people MORE for a public health system than whatever we pay now. The more you pay in taxes, the less money you have for the system. That means no economy. It's discretionary versus disposable income. I pay more into taxes for the public options than my own. As I'm sure every union member around does too or city worker(except for places like Arkansas). And I'll never read a NYT poll! |
|
|
| (465998) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 21:11:48 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 21:08:53 2009. US Census Bureau says that just 9% of the 84% US residents who have health care, obtain it privately. The rest are insured through a plan provided by their employer or covered by some government funded program.===== So my problem is with less than 10% of the nation. Well, you can never solve a problem for 100% of the people. |
|
|
| (466018) | |
Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Jun 23 21:44:32 2009, in response to Re: Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Government Health Care Works Better, posted by Orange Blossom Special on Tue Jun 23 18:02:23 2009. Praise allah I don't think there's a public hospital here for who knows how many hundreds of miles near me.That explains this: Thursday, December 4, 2008 Orlando Business Journal Florida slips in health survey High incidences of infectious disease and a high rate of uninsured people caused Florida to drop to near the bottom of the list in a state-by-state analysis of the nation’s health. Florida was No. 45 in the 2008 America’s Health Rankings, a report that is the result of a partnership between United Health Foundation, the American Public Health Association and Partnership for Prevention. Florida was No. 41 in the rankings in 2007. The state’s strengths include a low prevalence of obesity, high immunization coverage and low levels of air pollution, the report said. Challenges include high incidence of infectious disease, high rate of uninsured population and high geographic disparity within the state, the report said. In the past year, the prevalence of smoking dropped by 8 percent, but the percentage of children in poverty increased by 23 percent. Since 1990, the infant mortality rate dropped by 33 percent and the violent crime rate was down 29 percent, the report said. Five states ranked lower than Florida in the survey. They were Texas, Tennessee, South Carolina, Mississippi and Louisiana, which was cited as the least healthy state this year. The healthiest state was Vermont, followed by Hawaii, New Hampshire, Minnesota and Utah, the report said. Overall, health of Americans failed to improve for the fourth consecutive year with key factors being unprecedented levels of obesity, increasing numbers of uninsured people and the persistence of risky health behaviors, particularly tobacco use, the report said. |
|
|
|
Page 5 of 7 |
||