Ryan's Budget Proposal - It's a Start

[sjt18]

Still right as rain. Always have been, and for the foreseeable future, always will be:

And that's removing almost 20% of the population from "the market" (sic).

The US gov't spent more than any of those countries on health care. By that date, 1/3 of Americans were already dependent on inefficient gov't provisions for their health care. The other 2/3's struggle to find value in a market completely corrupted by gov't regulations, fees, taxes, restrictions, etc. Even the employer based system is a good ol' boy gov't institution that should have died decades ago in favor of group/individual insurance based on the chosen associations of the individual.

You ask many of the right questions.... and always go to the wrong answer.

 

[sjt18]

Oh, btw. Our socialists let their socialists shift most of the R&D cost burden to American consumers. That's why new drugs cost less in Canada. To "save" money, they prohibit drug companies from building R&D costs into drugs. We pay instead.

 

[milohimself]

TEven the employer based system is a good ol' boy gov't institution that should have died decades ago in favor of group/individual insurance based on the chosen associations of the individual.

This is incorrect... Employer-provided insurance was an indirect result of WWII wage freezes. Nobody "designed" it. Extreme measures were needed to prevail in WWII, and some changes stuck. I agree, it should not be the burden of the employer to provide health insurance.

Have you ever considered the amount of burden the uninsured and the poorly insured place on the rest of society? Unless ER's and urgent care centers start turning people away by the masses, the reality of life is this: Whether or not it is socialized or operated by the free market, you will be paying somebody's medical costs one way or another. You have absolutely no other options in the matter. There is one cheap way and one costly way to go about it.

 

[milohimself]

Oh, btw. Our socialists let their socialists shift most of the R&D cost burden to American consumers. That's why new drugs cost less in Canada. To "save" money, they prohibit drug companies from building R&D costs into drugs. We pay instead.

What are you going on about? Our "socialists let their socialists" do something? Every other highly developed nation on the planet being a universal system, almost all of which implementing price controls is what sticks the US with high prices. This effects a couple things: Canada and other universal systems have lower prices for brand name drugs, but actually typically pay more for generic drugs while they cost less in the US.

 

[kptvol]

Because we aren't following the real world models which starkly demonstrate how it is more efficient. Even though that's what the supermajority want. It's not even on the table in our democracy (sic).

Again, an area of our democracy (sic) less than Castro's Cuba.

Having someone in an office miles away from the patient telling the doctor what he can do isn't going to work. You should see some of the garbage these VA guys approve. The MO is always to go for cheapest possible solution for right now, even if a more expensive procedure now would save money in the long run. I guess the hope is that the patient will just die before another expense is necessary.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[kptvol]

Let me see if I have this right:

The supermajority wants what Gibbs wants.
Gibbs wants true democracy where individuals get choices and a say

then

Gibbs hates the consumer culture in this country
Gibbs advocates massive culture change to reflect his point of view away from where it is now

Awesome

How do you not follow that? Guess you've been brainwashed, too.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[utgibbs]

wait a minute. obesity might have an effect on health metrics? you realize you've argued the exact opposite for years now right?

That's why there is a lol: at the bottom. I thought the moose heart might have given it away. There is no doubt obesity is a major health issue. The problem is you trying to explain the per capita health care costs with that argument when there is a few percentage points difference between US, Canada, UK.

 

[kptvol]

That's why there is a lol: at the bottom. I thought the moose heart might have given it away. There is no doubt obesity is a major health issue. The problem is you trying to explain the per capita health care costs with that argument when there is a few percentage points difference between US, Canada, UK.

You've argued a thousandth of a percentage point is a statistically significant difference.

 

[utgibbs]

You've argued a thousandth of a percentage point is a statistically significant difference.

I argued INCREASING was not the same as DECREASING. You tried to say otherwise.

And the obesity argument is still infantile in the health care cost debate.