Repealing Obamacare (3 Viewers)

[barfo]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/23/shane-warren-speegle-says_n_1694577.html

And welfare queens are driving Cadillacs!

barfo

 

[dviss1]

If you can't afford $60, you're fucked no matter what care you need.

So go and fucking die since you're fucked anyway.

#libertarianlogic

 

[dviss1]

And you truly need to stop pretending like the Republicans are trying to do anything meaningful on healthcare.

You can't pass ANYTHING good using reconciliation, only change budgetary ways to pay for (cut to fucking ribbons) things.

They just want to make cuts. Block granting Medicaid is a cut. And yes that kills people. It's not hyperbole.

Ya'll love when Orange the Hutt uses executive orders to do shit but were PISSED at Obama and gave CRICKETS to Bush..

 

[Denny Crane]

And welfare queens are driving Cadillacs!

barfo

If you need $60, you can make it the hard way. If your psoriasis is so bad you care to.

It's not like we're not paying enough in taxes. If you want to pay for health care for those who can't afford the $60, cut spending somewhere else. You can start by cutting the "tea and circuses" budgets.

 

[Denny Crane]

So go and fucking die since you're fucked anyway.

#libertarianlogic

Go make $60, find a doctor who'll do the work pro bono, go to a public hospital or clinic, or go to an urgent care clinic.

77% of doctors do pro bono work.

You're making noise about nothing.

If you can't afford $60, you need a fucking roof over your head and food more than you need your psoriasis taken care of.

Medicaid "had no significant effect" on health outcomes vs. being uninsured

So yeah, you're fucked if you can't afford $60.

 

[Chris Craig]

No money, you get care and they sue you or whatever. You get the care.

EDIT:

2/3 of all hospitals in the US are public or non-profit ones. The public ones cannot deny care for any issue you may have, regardless of your ability to pay.

All hospitals and urgent care clinics must treat patients regardless of their ability to pay.

My note: for the past 10 years, my entire health care has been through the neighborhood urgent care clinic. For my lupus, I do see a specialist, but the urgent care clinics were able to prescribe the same drugs the rheumatologist did.

In my neighborhood in San Diego, there were 2 or 3 women's clinics that would treat for free.

https://insight.kellogg.northwester...the-cost-of-the-uninsured-nonprofit-hospitals

The government does provide some compensation to hospitals for treating low-income patients. Most of it is in the form of Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) payments, which, according to federal law, are owed to any qualified hospital that serves a large number of Medicaid and uninsured patients. But the research shows it is not enough to offset hospital costs. “The DSH payments are less than the uncompensated care that’s provided,” explains Garthwaite.

Nor does the cost fall on those who hold private insurance policies, as many policymakers assume. “There’s this idea that hospitals simply pass on the costs of uncompensated care to privately insured patients by raising prices,” Garthwaite says—a phenomenon known as “cost-shifting,” which some have also interpreted as a “hidden tax” on all Americans.

“We show evidence that it’s not true. If it were true, we wouldn’t see profits fall—but we see profits fall meaningfully following an increase in the share of the population that is uninsured.” Beyond the empirical evidence, though, Garthwaite says it is not clear that hospitals could shift costs in the way many policymakers assume they do. “Hospitals are sophisticated financial organizations,” he says. “If raising prices would have made them more money, they would have already raised prices.”

Ultimately, hospitals are left to absorb at least two-thirds of the cost of all of this uncompensated care, the researchers estimate.

Burden on Nonprofits
Interestingly, nonprofit hospitals end up absorbing the bulk of this care. A majority of private hospitals in the United States—more than 70 percent—are nonprofit firms and therefore expected to provide a “community benefit” in exchange for tax relief. One key component of this community benefit is charity care for indigent patients. For-profit firms do not face a similar community-benefit standard.

This means that when there are changes in the supply or demand of healthcare services to the poor, most of the burden—in terms of uncompensated care costs—falls on nonprofit hospitals, a finding that sheds new light on the role nonprofits play in the healthcare industry. In contrast to what many believe, nonprofit hospitals are not simply for-profits in disguise. “Previously, it wasn’t clear exactly what kind of role nonprofit hospitals were playing,” he says. “Th

I wouldn't call it getting care. There is not much care in the "services" they give poor people without insurance. They do what little they must and tell them to leave even if they should be admitted. Poor people who make very little and all or most of their money goes to pay rent and electricity and for other basic needs. There is nothing left to pay for insurance. Thats why so many are on welfare getting foodstamps and OHP. They can't even afford food. Mimimum wage is shit. There needs to be a living wage. Minimum wage is always too far below inflation for poor people to be able to move up in society. To be able to afford things like health insurance. The American Dream is a lie. I love my country. I don't love how its people are treated. I know there are far less fortunate people in the world. Far worse countries where people starve and live in the worst conditions imaginable. I also know the US is the richest country in the world and we could take care of all of our people if we wanted too, but our society is about the rich staying rich and the poor staying poor. There has to be poor people for there to be rich people.

 

[Denny Crane]

I wouldn't call it getting care. There is not much care in the "services" they give poor people without insurance. They do what little they must and tell them to leave even if they should be admitted. Poor people who make very little and all or most of their money goes to pay rent and electricity and for other basic needs. There is nothing left to pay for insurance. Thats why so many are on welfare getting foodstamps and OHP. They can't even afford food. Mimimum wage is shit. There needs to be a living wage. Minimum wage is always too far below inflation for poor people to be able to move up in society. To be able to afford things like health insurance. The American Dream is a lie. I love my country. I don't love how its people are treated. I know there are far less fortunate people in the world. Far worse countries where people starve and live in the worst conditions imaginable. I also know the US is the richest country in the world and we could take care of all of our people if we wanted too, but our society is about the rich staying rich and the poor staying poor. There has to be poor people for there to be rich people.

There are no bleeding heart doctors.

There has to be poor people for there to be rich people? That makes zero sense. Though I think our poor would be rich in many other countries - it's relative, no?

Some people really should consider joining the army if they can't otherwise provide for themselves.

The truly needy cannot possibly be so costly it takes a $2T/year program to provide for them.

And surely with $21,903 PER PERSON in government spending, they can take care of the people who need the help.

I think you need to look at all the social programs and government agencies and prioritize the spending so people get taken care of instead of insurance companies getting payments from the government.

Why do we need both:

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

and

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

?

 

[barfo]

Why do we need both:

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

and

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

?

That's a question google could easily answer for you, if you don't already know.

NIOSH is a research body. OSHA is regulatory.

Sure, you could combine them, but they serve different functions so the savings would be negligible.

barfo

 

[dviss1]

There are no bleeding heart doctors.

There has to be poor people for there to be rich people? That makes zero sense. Though I think our poor would be rich in many other countries - it's relative, no?

Some people really should consider joining the army if they can't otherwise provide for themselves.

The truly needy cannot possibly be so costly it takes a $2T/year program to provide for them.

And surely with $21,903 PER PERSON in government spending, they can take care of the people who need the help.

I think you need to look at all the social programs and government agencies and prioritize the spending so people get taken care of instead of insurance companies getting payments from the government.

Why do we need both:

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

and

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

?

Countries that have Single Payer healthcare pay about $3300 per person. Currently we pay 250% of that. Figure this shit out Denny.

 

[Denny Crane]

Countries that have Single Payer healthcare pay about $3300 per person. Currently we pay 250% of that. Figure this shit out Denny.

And Obama increased that amount and gave government money to the insurance companies.

Surely you don’t want the government writing actual checks to corporations, Mr. Sanders supporter?

 

[Denny Crane]

That's a question google could easily answer for you, if you don't already know.

NIOSH is a research body. OSHA is regulatory.

Sure, you could combine them, but they serve different functions so the savings would be negligible.

barfo

They do overlap in function.

 

[dviss1]

And Obama increased that amount and gave government money to the insurance companies.

Surely you don’t want the government writing actual checks to corporations, Mr. Sanders supporter?

Dude you're so disingenuous with your trolling. And on top of it you aren't making sense NOR are you addressing the chart I gave you. I thought you understood those.

 

[dviss1]

And Obama increased that amount and gave government money to the insurance companies.

Surely you don’t want the government writing actual checks to corporations, Mr. Sanders supporter?

You know damn well I've never been for the republican plan put forth by Bob Dole. I've always been about single payer.

 

[Denny Crane]

Dude you're so disingenuous with your trolling. And on top of it you aren't making sense NOR are you addressing the chart I gave you. I thought you understood those.

ObamaCare mandates people write checks to big corporations. Fact.

You argue for it, I think giving tax payer money to corporations is not a good function of government.

Trump just stopped direct payments to the corporations that they supposedly charged less in return for. Yet rates went up everywhere, every year, of ObamaCare so far. And by double digits.

Your chart is meaningless. It doesn’t matter what we spend on health care. It’s our choice to spend that much, we lead the world in innovation, research, disease prevention, and even Ebola treatment. Other countries can pay less because they piggy back off our efforts.

There has to be a point to a chart for it to mean anything in a discussion.

Yours is an appeal to illogic.

 

[Denny Crane]

You know damn well I've never been for the republican plan put forth by Bob Dole. I've always been about single payer.

ObamaCare mandates that taxpayers buy insurance, giving their hard earned money to a corporation, whether they want to or not. If they don’t, they get taxed by the IRS and the money still goes to the corporations.

Republicans offered straight up single payer, the day McCain did his prima Donna move. No (or maybe a very small number) of democrats voted for it.

Your guy Sanders didn’t vote for it, either.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ingle-payer-amendment/?utm_term=.807f756a94d3

Sanders won’t vote for Republican ‘single-payer’ amendment


The Daines amendment, which the Montana senator has admitted he won’t actually vote for, will propose the text of a “Medicare for All” bill backed by Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.). Sanders, who has delayed the release of his own single-payer bill until the end of the health-care debate — a decision that has pushed back his bill several times — was not quite the target of Daines’s amendment. Democrats saw it as a ploy to get some of the party’s more vulnerable senators to vote “against single payer,” angering the party’s base.

 

[dviss1]

ObamaCare mandates that taxpayers buy insurance, giving their hard earned money to a corporation, whether they want to or not. If they don’t, they get taxed by the IRS and the money still goes to the corporations.

Republicans offered straight up single payer, the day McCain did his prima Donna move. No (or maybe a very small number) of democrats voted for it.

Your guy Sanders didn’t vote for it, either.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ingle-payer-amendment/?utm_term=.807f756a94d3

Sanders won’t vote for Republican ‘single-payer’ amendment


The Daines amendment, which the Montana senator has admitted he won’t actually vote for, will propose the text of a “Medicare for All” bill backed by Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.). Sanders, who has delayed the release of his own single-payer bill until the end of the health-care debate — a decision that has pushed back his bill several times — was not quite the target of Daines’s amendment. Democrats saw it as a ploy to get some of the party’s more vulnerable senators to vote “against single payer,” angering the party’s base.

I'm going to need you to stop being so full of shit:

Sanders: Dems won't vote on 'sham' single-payer amendment

Senate Democrats are not going to play into Sen. Steve Daines's (R-Mont.) effort to divide the party on the issue of single-payer healthcare, a spokesman for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) told Vox Wednesday.

"The Democratic caucus will not participate in the Republicans' sham process. No amendment will get a vote until we see the final legislation and know what bill we are amending,” Josh Miller-Lewis said in a text to Vox's Jeff Stein.

“Once Republicans show us their final bill, Sen. Sanders looks forward to getting a vote on his amendment that makes clear the Senate believes that the United States must join every major country and guarantee health care as a right, not a privilege."

 

[barfo]

They do overlap in function.

The FBI and the CIA overlap in function. So they could be combined. The DOD and the DOE overlap in function. So they could be combined.

Etc etc. So combine all the agencies into one big agency. Great. You could call this combined agency "The federal government".

Done and done. Happy now?

barfo

 

[dviss1]

Democrats saw it as a ploy to get some of the party’s more vulnerable senators to vote “against single payer,” angering the party’s base.

QFT. More right wing bull.

No actual realistic legislation. Just ploys to get them to vote against "single payer".

You even fell for it.

 

[dviss1]

The FBI and the CIA overlap in function. So they could be combined. The DOD and the DOE overlap in function. So they could be combined.

Etc etc. So combine all the agencies into one big agency. Great. You could call this combined agency "The federal government".

Done and done. Happy now?

barfo

Denny wants his IT and Customer Service departments to have the same hierarchy.

Yeah, no.

 

[Denny Crane]

I'm going to need you to stop being so full of shit:

Sanders: Dems won't vote on 'sham' single-payer amendment

Senate Democrats are not going to play into Sen. Steve Daines's (R-Mont.) effort to divide the party on the issue of single-payer healthcare, a spokesman for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) told Vox Wednesday.

"The Democratic caucus will not participate in the Republicans' sham process. No amendment will get a vote until we see the final legislation and know what bill we are amending,” Josh Miller-Lewis said in a text to Vox's Jeff Stein.

“Once Republicans show us their final bill, Sen. Sanders looks forward to getting a vote on his amendment that makes clear the Senate believes that the United States must join every major country and guarantee health care as a right, not a privilege."

Sham? It was DEMOCRAT Conyer's plan they offered.

Sanders wouldn't vote for it because: 1) it wasn't HIS bill, and/or 2) out of spite.

 

[Denny Crane]

The FBI and the CIA overlap in function. So they could be combined. The DOD and the DOE overlap in function. So they could be combined.

Etc etc. So combine all the agencies into one big agency. Great. You could call this combined agency "The federal government".

Done and done. Happy now?

barfo

The FBI and CIA do not overlap.

The two health and safety politburos do.

 

[Denny Crane]

QFT. More right wing bull.

No actual realistic legislation. Just ploys to get them to vote against "single payer".

You even fell for it.

You need to get your prejudice straight. You're so blinded by your prejudice you can't see the facts.

First, it is the WaPost, as left wing a newspaper as there is. Second, it was Conyers' Bill. Conyers is a long time (e.g. the swamp) Democrat from Michigan.

Republicans wanted to demonstrate that Democrats wouldn't vote for anything republicans brought up for a vote, including Conyers' single payer bill.

https://www.healthcare-now.org/blog/conyers-reintroduces-national-single-payer-health-care-bill/

Conyers Reintroduces National Single-Payer Health Care Bill
Today, Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) reintroduced H.R. 676, “The Expanded And Improved Medicare For All Act.” This bill would establish a privately-delivered, publicly-financed universal health care system, where physicians and non-profit health care providers would be in charge of medical decisions — not insurance companies.

H.R. 676 would expand and improve the highly popular Medicare program and provide universal access to care to all Americans. The program would be primarily funded by a modest payroll tax on employers and employees, a financial transaction tax, and higher taxes on the wealthiest Americans.

 

[dviss1]

Sham? It was DEMOCRAT Conyer's plan they offered.

Sanders wouldn't vote for it because: 1) it wasn't HIS bill, and/or 2) out of spite.

Is a Democrat a Democratic Socialist? Is a Democrat even liberal these days??

The bill was a piece of shit. You're also using your opinion and conjecture to determine why Sanders voted against it. Not facts.

 

[dviss1]

You need to get your prejudice straight. You're so blinded by your prejudice you can't see the facts.

First, it is the WaPost, as left wing a newspaper as there is. Second, it was Conyers' Bill. Conyers is a long time (e.g. the swamp) Democrat from Michigan.

Republicans wanted to demonstrate that Democrats wouldn't vote for anything republicans brought up for a vote, including Conyers' single payer bill.

https://www.healthcare-now.org/blog/conyers-reintroduces-national-single-payer-health-care-bill/

Conyers Reintroduces National Single-Payer Health Care Bill
Today, Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) reintroduced H.R. 676, “The Expanded And Improved Medicare For All Act.” This bill would establish a privately-delivered, publicly-financed universal health care system, where physicians and non-profit health care providers would be in charge of medical decisions — not insurance companies.

H.R. 676 would expand and improve the highly popular Medicare program and provide universal access to care to all Americans. The program would be primarily funded by a modest payroll tax on employers and employees, a financial transaction tax, and higher taxes on the wealthiest Americans.

Yeah but how many Christmas tree ornaments were on it? They always add amendments to these bills to make sure that they won't pass.

Make sense.

It's like you haven't been paying attention to politics for the past 20-30 years.

 

[dviss1]

You need to get your prejudice straight. You're so blinded by your prejudice you can't see the facts.

First, it is the WaPost, as left wing a newspaper as there is. Second, it was Conyers' Bill. Conyers is a long time (e.g. the swamp) Democrat from Michigan.

Republicans wanted to demonstrate that Democrats wouldn't vote for anything republicans brought up for a vote, including Conyers' single payer bill.

https://www.healthcare-now.org/blog/conyers-reintroduces-national-single-payer-health-care-bill/

Conyers Reintroduces National Single-Payer Health Care Bill
Today, Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) reintroduced H.R. 676, “The Expanded And Improved Medicare For All Act.” This bill would establish a privately-delivered, publicly-financed universal health care system, where physicians and non-profit health care providers would be in charge of medical decisions — not insurance companies.

H.R. 676 would expand and improve the highly popular Medicare program and provide universal access to care to all Americans. The program would be primarily funded by a modest payroll tax on employers and employees, a financial transaction tax, and higher taxes on the wealthiest Americans.

Did you only put that picture up because Conyers is black? Because I know who Conyers is.

 

[Denny Crane]

Is a Democrat a Democratic Socialist? Is a Democrat even liberal these days??

The bill was a piece of shit. You're also using your opinion and conjecture to determine why Sanders voted against it. Not facts.

Why does it matter. You're just putting up a smoke screen. The plan proposed was single payer and sponsored by a democrat. Democrats wouldn't vote for it, out of spite. Even though the plan is what they propose.

 

[Denny Crane]

Did you only put that picture up because Conyers is black? Because I know who Conyers is.

No, just so people can put the face to the name.

 

[Denny Crane]

Yeah but how many Christmas tree ornaments were on it? They always add amendments to these bills to make sure that they won't pass.

Make sense.

It's like you haven't been paying attention to politics for the past 20-30 years.

It's like you aren't paying attention.

I keep having to fill you in on the facts and you keep spouting stuff that isn't fact.

There were no amendments to Conyers' bill. It was as he proposed it.

Republicans put it forward to demonstrate Democrats were more interested in preserving Obama's legacy (and not voting for anything at all republicans bring to a vote) than in what they've proposed as the ultimate solution.

 

[dviss1]

It's like you aren't paying attention.

I keep having to fill you in on the facts and you keep spouting stuff that isn't fact.

There were no amendments to Conyers' bill. It was as he proposed it.

Republicans put it forward to demonstrate Democrats were more interested in preserving Obama's legacy (and not voting for anything at all republicans bring to a vote) than in what they've proposed as the ultimate solution.

Don't try to act like the Republicans didn't have amendments to that bill.

 

[dviss1]

It's like you aren't paying attention.

I keep having to fill you in on the facts and you keep spouting stuff that isn't fact.

There were no amendments to Conyers' bill. It was as he proposed it.

Republicans put it forward to demonstrate Democrats were more interested in preserving Obama's legacy (and not voting for anything at all republicans bring to a vote) than in what they've proposed as the ultimate solution.

Disagreeing with you or not thinking you know what you're talking about right now doesn't make you right.

You just said above that this was an amendment to the Republican bill. The Republicans have never shown their final bill and wanted Democrats to vote Yes on that Amendment without knowing what the entire bill looks like.

"Once Republicans show us their final bill, Sen. Sanders looks forward to getting a vote on his amendment that makes clear the Senate believes that the United States must join every major country and guarantee health care as a right, not a privilege."