2016 Election -- Part II
Poll
 | 57 votes (47.89%) | ||
| | 33 votes (27.73%) | ||
| | 12 votes (10.08%) | ||
| | 10 votes (8.4%) | ||
| | 4 votes (3.36%) | ||
| | 3 votes (2.52%) |
119 members have voted
Quote: SOOPOOI need more info. Do you have a job that gives you health insurance as a benefit? If not, are you incapable of finding such a job? Or just don't want to because you would prefer that someone else subsidize your health care needs?
None of the above.
I run my own business. I am 25 years old, so I am still eligible to stay under my parent's insurance until I turn 26, which is the end of this year.
Quote: gamerfreakNone of the above.
I run my own business. I am 25 years old, so I am still eligible to stay under my parent's insurance until I turn 26, which is the end of this year.
First of all, congratulations about having your own business at 25. I look at healthcare insurance as I do most other commodities; if you want something that is worth something you will have to pay for it, in some fashion. The way I pay for my healthcare insurance is by negotiating a contract with my employer that pays me less money than if I didn't need that healthcare insurance. So instead of making, say, $200k a year, I accept $180k with full health insurance. So even though my healthcare insurance is 'free', it is no such thing. My hospital has hundreds of workers who make less than $20 an hour but keep the job BECAUSE they also get healthcare insurance, even though there are many jobs (waiter) that pay more. So lets say you are making $60k in your job, I think you should think this way.... I am making $50k and have health insurance.
There are some (liberals- Sanders) that think that health insurance should be like air, if you are born you are entitled to it. If that is what our society wants then we should just go to the system that a large part of the world has, nationalized healthcare. Just be prepared to pay for it (massive tax increase), and be unhappy with it. I live in a border city (Buffalo) and remember distinctly the rich Canadians coming over for care (kidney stones specifically) rather than be subjected to long waits for care at home.
Good luck in finding something that works for you. I know it's not easy.
Quote: SOOPOOFirst of all, congratulations about having your own business at 25. I look at healthcare insurance as I do most other commodities; if you want something that is worth something you will have to pay for it, in some fashion. The way I pay for my healthcare insurance is by negotiating a contract with my employer that pays me less money than if I didn't need that healthcare insurance. So instead of making, say, $200k a year, I accept $180k with full health insurance. So even though my healthcare insurance is 'free', it is no such thing. My hospital has hundreds of workers who make less than $20 an hour but keep the job BECAUSE they also get healthcare insurance, even though there are many jobs (waiter) that pay more. So lets say you are making $60k in your job, I think you should think this way.... I am making $50k and have health insurance.
There are some (liberals- Sanders) that think that health insurance should be like air, if you are born you are entitled to it. If that is what our society wants then we should just go to the system that a large part of the world has, nationalized healthcare. Just be prepared to pay for it (massive tax increase), and be unhappy with it. I live in a border city (Buffalo) and remember distinctly the rich Canadians coming over for care (kidney stones specifically) rather than be subjected to long waits for care at home.
Good luck in finding something that works for you. I know it's not easy.
I appreciate the compliment.
I'm of the opinion that services essential to a modern society should be provided by government. Defense, lawmaking/enforcement, infrastructure, education, and healthcare. That makes me a socialist according to many on the right, but I don't think it's that extreme of an opinion.
When you add a profit motive to something like healthcare, it breeds victimization. If one party of the transaction has the choice to pay up or die, that's one hell of a bargaining chip. At minimum it needs to be heavily regulated.
Despite having a fully privatized system, we spend more tax dollars per capital than any other country on healthcare. Someone is profiting on that, and I'm willing to bet it's not the person making $7.25/hr at Walmart.
Part of it is that we already have free healthcare, the most expensive kind there is. It's called the ER. We've decided as a society that we can't allow people to die on the hostpital floor due to their inability to pay. I've heard the far right argue that should even be allowed, but we have medical professionals that have literally taken an oath otherwise.
That cost is further exacerbated when low income people do not have access to primary care. In that situation, they either wait to go to the ER until their illness has progressed way too far, or use the ER as pseudo primary care, admitting themselves for.
Quote: gamerfreakI'm of the opinion that services essential to a modern society should be provided by government. Defense, lawmaking/enforcement, infrastructure, education, and healthcare. That makes me a socialist according to many on the right, but I don't think it's that extreme of an opinion.
There's socialism then there's socialism. The actual socialist party of America may want to nationalize industry and banks and so forth, but I think very few Americans want socialism to that extent. At least I don't.
I just think the private market has had plenty of time to prove itself in health care, and it hasn't done it so far, except for some who can afford the costs regardless of how much they increase.
More or less a captive customer base is at the mercy of the seller, and that's what we are in the healthcare industry, so there's no real balance between supply and demand. If you get cancer, you can't just try to wait until prices drop. You need to buy, whatever the price or go without.
Has there ever been a glut of doctors and services to help bring costs down? I don't think so.
It should be insurance for something that's very expensive or unusual -- broken bones, expensive disease to cure, etc. I don't want to have my typical cold/flu/etc. stuff covered by health insurance. That's like insuring (at a premium) that my shoes will get worn out -- yeah, no sh** that's gonna happen. I don't want to insure something that's very likely to happen. That's stupid.
Car insurance doesn't cover gas, maintenance, oil changes, replacing burnt out lights, etc. Why should health insurance cover the same (relative) stuff?
By decreasing what you are covered for, you pay less money for insurance. You also get a much worse deal by paying for the lower end health stuff with insurance. Insurance is basically a -EV bet that'll save you from a huge negative variance experience.
Quote: RSIMO.....
It should be insurance for something that's very expensive or unusual -- broken bones, expensive disease to cure, etc. I don't want to have my typical cold/flu/etc. stuff covered by health insurance. That's like insuring (at a premium) that my shoes will get worn out -- yeah, no sh** that's gonna happen. I don't want to insure something that's very likely to happen. That's stupid.
Car insurance doesn't cover gas, maintenance, oil changes, replacing burnt out lights, etc. Why should health insurance cover the same (relative) stuff?
By decreasing what you are covered for, you pay less money for insurance. You also get a much worse deal by paying for the lower end health stuff with insurance. Insurance is basically a -EV bet that'll save you from a huge negative variance experience.
Sounds great in theory, but how will it work for people who need insurance that already have a medical condition?
Using your analogy, it would be like calling up the car insurance company for a new policy and casually mentioning you plan on going street racing once you're covered.
he was verified as the EC winner by congress.
Several Dems stamped their feet in protest, but:
"Vice President Biden, who presided over the session, repeatedly slammed the gavel on debate, saying the objections could not be entertained. "It is over," Biden said as Republicans applauded.
So that's it, all that's left is the pipe dream
of impeachment by his own party. Pure
fantasy. 75% of Americans say they want
Trump to succeed, more than half of those
are Dems. Just tearing down most of the
damage Obama caused will make him a
resounding success, and how hard can that
be.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/06/congress-certify-trumps-victory-friday-challengers-grasp-straws/96218660/
Quote: EvenBobTrump sailed over the final hurdle today,
he was verified as the EC winner by congress.
Several Dems stamped their feet in protest, but:
"Vice President Biden, who presided over the session, repeatedly slammed the gavel on debate, saying the objections could not be entertained. "It is over," Biden said as Republicans applauded.
So that's it, all that's left is the pipe dream
of impeachment by his own party. Pure
fantasy. 75% of Americans say they want
Trump to succeed, more than half of those
are Dems. Just tearing down most of the
damage Obama caused will make him a
resounding success, and how hard can that
be.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/06/congress-certify-trumps-victory-friday-challengers-grasp-straws/96218660/
Care to elaborate on all the damage Obama caused?
Quote: gamerfreakSounds great in theory, but how will it work for people who need insurance that already have a medical condition?
They should already have insurance before they get the medical condition.
Quote: EvenBob. 75% of Americans say they want
Trump to succeed
He could start by resigning.
I've had this discussion with Ron before. If he accomplishes some specific rightwing agenda, that is a success, but not for me.
So he could be a great success in one sense, to some,, but I would consider it a terrible thing depending on what it is. I would rather see them work on the ACA than repeal it, for instance. But irrational behavior dictates they can't pursue any course but repeal first.
Quote: RSThey should already have insurance before they get the medical condition.
That's a dumb answer.
I'm assuming you support the repeal of Obamacare.
So for those ~20 million people who are about to lose coverage thanks to the Republicans, the ones who already have medical conditions are just out of luck and don't deserve any new coverage, in RS's eyes?
Quote: ams288That's a dumb answer.
I'm assuming you support the repeal of Obamacare.
So for those ~20 million people who are about to lose coverage thanks to the Republicans, the ones who already have medical conditions are just out of luck and don't deserve any new coverage, in RS's eyes?
The question I was responding to was one where someone does not have insurance, gets a health condition, then seeks insurance.
As far as what to do about those currently covered by ACA, I'm not sure. However, that is a temporary issue (transferring coverage from ACA to something else), not a long term issue. It only needs to be dealt with once. Or let them go back to whatever they had before ACA.
I don't know the answer....it's not easy.
Quote: RSIt only needs to be dealt with once. Or let them go back to whatever they had before ACA.
I don't know the answer....it's not easy.
For many, that would be "nothing," because they had a pre-existing condition, couldn't afford a plan without the subsidies, etc.
Yes... it's not an easy answer. It appears some Republican Senators are discovering this as well. This week, ~4 of them have expressed concerns about repealing with no replacement.
Quote: ams288This week, ~4 of them have expressed concerns about repealing with no replacement.
If they kept it and tried to improve it, they could at least keep blaming Obama, no matter what. Guess they want to own it completely.
In any case, the problem is difficult enough that it will likely be troublesome no matter the changes.
Quote: RSThey should already have insurance before they get the medical condition.
And if they are dropped?
Quote: gamerfreakI appreciate the compliment.
I'm of the opinion that services essential to a modern society should be provided by government. Defense, lawmaking/enforcement, infrastructure, education, and healthcare. That makes me a socialist according to many on the right, but I don't think it's that extreme of an opinion.
When you add a profit motive to something like healthcare, it breeds victimization. If one party of the transaction has the choice to pay up or die, that's one hell of a bargaining chip. At minimum it needs to be heavily regulated.
Despite having a fully privatized system, we spend more tax dollars per capital than any other country on healthcare. Someone is profiting on that, and I'm willing to bet it's not the person making $7.25/hr at Walmart.
Part of it is that we already have free healthcare, the most expensive kind there is. It's called the ER. We've decided as a society that we can't allow people to die on the hostpital floor due to their inability to pay. I've heard the far right argue that should even be allowed, but we have medical professionals that have literally taken an oath otherwise.
That cost is further exacerbated when low income people do not have access to primary care. In that situation, they either wait to go to the ER until their illness has progressed way too far, or use the ER as pseudo primary care, admitting themselves for.
I just paid my water bill. Should that be paid for by the government. Bought food at supermarket yesterday. Should that be paid for by the government? toothpaste? Clearly these are as essential as "healthcare". Why should the government pay for my health care and not my food?
A minimum wage worker in my state already easily qualifies for free healthcare (Medicaid)
I am one of those doctors that has taken care of uninsured patients for my entire career, but not really altruistically. For the first half of my career the freebies were basically made up for by the artificially high rates insurance companies paid us, and for the second half, when insurance companies refused to just pay more to subsidize the freebies, hospitals that have large indigent populations have in various ways subsidized the docs willing to work there. Now it is easy for me, I am a plain old hospital employee that gets the same check every two weeks regardless of how much money the hospital can collect for my services. So my county (via tax dollars of course)(I work at a county hospital) pays me more than I generate via billing and collection.
Quote: ams288For many, that would be "nothing," because they had a pre-existing condition, couldn't afford a plan without the subsidies, etc.
Yes... it's not an easy answer. It appears some Republican Senators are discovering this as well. This week, ~4 of them have expressed concerns about repealing with no replacement.
Imagine being able to get fire insurance while the FD is on the scene, or getting car insurance after you crashed.
Allowing people to get insurance with pre-existing conditions, without everyone having mandatory insurance would bankrupt the companies.
Why would anyone pay for a product they may not need when it will be available when it is needed. That's not insurance.
Quote: SOOPOOI am one of those doctors that has taken care of uninsured patients for my entire career, but not really altruistically.
-You can kick them out of bed regardless of their condition and into the street and tell them to come back when they have money.
-Or you can treat them entirely at your expense.
-Or the expense can be covered by more people (taxes, charity, some other means I haven't thought of)
Assume you are free to pick one. I would like to know what other options we have?
Quote: MaxPen
When your first 2 cards in BJ total 10 or 11, and the dealer face card is 6, would you double down? Of course the answer would be yes, but it doesn’t mean that you will win very time. Right?
When a candidate behaves as a racist, a sexist, has too many bad reputations, and is not knowledgeable, and you believe in the common decency of the electorate, the common logic will then dictate the chance of success for that candidate will be extremely low. Right? The fact that Trump won the election, it does not erase his character flaws.
Yes, many voters and I put too much faith in the common decency of the American electorate, and it was a mistake. Clinton won the popular votes by nearly 3 million ballots had given me a little hope in the human’s common decency.
And who would have known that Trump got help from the FBI and the Russian and various fake news? It would be very difficult to estimate the impact of fake news, and the meddling in the presidential election by the FBI and the Russian. However, if you look that the election result at a microscopic level – despite losing by nearly 3 million votes, Trump won the election by a mere 80,000 votes spread across 3 states, it makes you wonder what the final outcome would have been if Trump was not helped by the FBI and the Russian.
Edit to add this comment from Christina Wos Donnelly on the Mother Jones Facebook page :
https://www.facebook.com/motherjones/posts/10154320298062144
…HRC was campaigned against by 3 Democrats, 1 Independent, all 19 Republicans, 1 Libertarian, 1 Green Partier, the RNC, 2 Russian spy agencies and a whole factory of paid trolls, Breitbart & the alt-right, Julian Assange & Wikileaks, a hostile media, a deluge of dark money, AND the FBI, all trying to take a piece out of her, and STILL she won the popular vote by millions. 3 million to date. Take out vote suppression all across the South, TX and the swing states, and you’ve got your double digit lead. Donald Trump won by a mere 80,000 votes spread across 3 states, that’s one half of one percent.
Quote: bobbartopWhat does a person who is not biased stand for? Someone who is on the fence about important issues? Nothing?
It's not wrong to have a strong opinion and stand for something. But it's wrong to trash the other side if you know in your heart that the other side also has some valid points and the reason it is done is to further that person's agenda regardless. The end does not justify the means. It's also IMO wrong to stand for something just because it benefits you, or the group you happen to belong to or be associated with. It's not wrong to put America First. It's wrong to put Yourself First. And I'm not pointing the finger at you, bobbartop. I'm just speaking generally. I myself have been guilty of this at times. I'm not perfect. I need to do better.
Quote: SOOPOOI just paid my water bill. Should that be paid for by the government. Bought food at supermarket yesterday. Should that be paid for by the government? toothpaste? Clearly these are as essential as "healthcare". Why should the government pay for my health care and not my food?
A minimum wage worker in my state already easily qualifies for free healthcare (Medicaid)
I am one of those doctors that has taken care of uninsured patients for my entire career, but not really altruistically. For the first half of my career the freebies were basically made up for by the artificially high rates insurance companies paid us, and for the second half, when insurance companies refused to just pay more to subsidize the freebies, hospitals that have large indigent populations have in various ways subsidized the docs willing to work there. Now it is easy for me, I am a plain old hospital employee that gets the same check every two weeks regardless of how much money the hospital can collect for my services. So my county (via tax dollars of course)(I work at a county hospital) pays me more than I generate via billing and collection.
It is good to know that you pay your water bill. I sincerely hope that you have no student loans.
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=doctor+refuse+to+pay+student+loans
It appears to me that you lack the compassion and empathy required for the healthcare profession. Perhaps healthcare should not be your profession. May I suggest casino game designer as your new profession, so that you can join Paigowdan and Paradigm in …
Water and food are essential, but they are not as essential as "healthcare". Water and food cost are predictable and manageable, and quick alternative solutions or helps frequently can easily be found. You are comparing water/food cost and healthcare cost -- you are comparing apple and orange.
When my car is broke down at home or someplace far away from home, it would be very difficult for me to shop around for a good deal because of the mobility and the unknown mechanical and/or electrical problems, and consequently I'm most likely will be at the mercy of any or nearest repair shop. Healthcare is similar to the aforementioned "autocare" example, but with two major differences: Healthcare often time can be a matter of life & death, and therefore is subjected to human emotion & empathy in emergency situation, and healthcare cost can reach an astronomical level.
No, I'm not advocating everything should be free in society. Healthcare is unique because of its unpredictability in occurrence, seriousness of disease, cost, and the lack of quick & alternate financial solutions in case of emergency or in life & death situations; and therefore, deserves a special treatment of society by making it free or subsidize for those who cannot afford or could be financially ruined in serious illness situations.
Quote: BozNot at all, we just don't like the ones who let us know at every turn what's best for us. Obama did it for 8 years and because of it we have President Trump. For that I thank ME, AMS and their kind. They need to continue to do their Patriotic duty and change nothing in their actions.
No, Obama was not the reason. The FBI, Russian, fake news, and the lack of common decency of Trumpers are contributing factors to the making the racist, sexist and rapist president-elect Trump.
Quote: RSI see lots of people calling Trump a racist, sexist, and rapist. I've yet to see proof to merit that.
Self admission is pretty damning proof.
Quote: SOOPOOI just paid my water bill. Should that be paid for by the government. Bought food at supermarket yesterday. Should that be paid for by the government? toothpaste? Clearly these are as essential as "healthcare". Why should the government pay for my health care and not my food?
Sure, I believe if someone cannot afford food they should be able to get food stamps or go to a food bank.
Why the "if someone cannot afford it" qualifier for food and not healthcare?
There are way more gatekeepers are barriers to the healthcare industry. I can grow food in my backyard. I can't grow chemotherapy.
Quote: gamerfreakSelf admission is pretty damning proof.
I didn't know this happened. Just did a quick search on google and couldn't find anything. Link?
Quote: RSI didn't know this happened. Just did a quick search on google and couldn't find anything. Link?
Sure. There's this just for starters. But I know you've seen it.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8wM248Wo54U
Quote: RSI didn't know this happened. Just did a quick search on google and couldn't find anything. Link?
You can find it here:
https://www.google.com/search?q=get+your+head+out+of+the+sand&biw=1131&bih=853&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjUkaCI57LRAhVhxoMKHSrmChIQsAQIIA
And here is a bonus point for Trumpers:
https://www.google.com/search?q=RS+dreaming+of+babe&biw=1131&bih=853&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwimzNax6bLRAhXnhlQKHcSDD0kQ_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=RS+%2B+sexy+babe&imgrc=PvDHoPARcQx5TM%3A
https://www.google.com/search?q=RS+dreaming+of+babe&biw=1131&bih=853&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwimzNax6bLRAhXnhlQKHcSDD0kQ_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=RS+%2B+sexy+babe
Quote: 777It is good to know that you pay your water bill. I sincerely hope that you have no student loans.
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=doctor+refuse+to+pay+student+loans
It appears to me that you lack the compassion and empathy required for the healthcare profession. Perhaps healthcare should not be your profession. May I suggest casino game designer as your new profession, so that you can join Paigowdan and Paradigm in …
Water and food are essential, but they are not as essential as "healthcare". Water and food cost are predictable and manageable, and quick alternative solutions or helps frequently can easily be found. You are comparing water/food cost and healthcare cost -- you are comparing apple and orange.
When my car is broke down at home or someplace far away from home, it would be very difficult for me to shop around for a good deal because of the mobility and the unknown mechanical and/or electrical problems, and consequently I'm most likely will be at the mercy of any or nearest repair shop. Healthcare is similar to the aforementioned "autocare" example, but with two major differences: Healthcare often time can be a matter of life & death, and therefore is subjected to human emotion & empathy in emergency situation, and healthcare cost can reach an astronomical level.
No, I'm not advocating everything should be free in society. Healthcare is unique because of its unpredictability in occurrence, seriousness of disease, cost, and the lack of quick & alternate financial solutions in case of emergency or in life & death situations; and therefore, deserves a special treatment of society by making it free or subsidize for those who cannot afford or could be financially ruined in serious illness situations.
I paid off my student loans as soon as I could, maybe 5 years after I became an attending physician. I hate debt, perhaps irrationally so. I don't think I am creative enough, or entrepreneurial enough, to be a table games designer. And I wouldn't like the pay cut......
As far as my empathy level, how about you and I make a bet as to how many times I have cried with patients and their families compared to a similar event for you?
I understand your valid point that healthcare costs, IF UNINSURED, are quite variable compared to food, housing, water, etc. The number of people that can afford Apple watches, Big Bertha drivers, 70 inch TV's, $3000 bankroll for Vegas trip, etc. that are UNINSURED is striking. Why are they uninsured? Because they cannot afford it! Healthcare insurance IS FREE for those that the government has deemed cannot afford it (Medicaid). What you and I are arguing about is what we should do about those who can afford it but choose not to afford it. I propose that many more can afford it, just it would make them change their lifestyle, and they would prefer the government (meaning 'others' through their tax dollars) subsidize them. You neglected to acknowledge my point about if you earn 60k consider it 50k with health insurance included.
I worked last night. I took care of a gentleman shot 4 times. I can assure you he had no Health Insurance. He got the same exact care that a Blue Cross patient would have gotten. Lack of Health Insurance is not lack of Health Care.
Quote: SOOPOOAs far as my empathy level, how about you and I make a bet as to how many times I have cried with patients and their families compared to a similar event for you?
Interesting. I consider myself an extreamly empathetic to a lot of different groups. Poor people, immigrants, addicts. The sort of people that make conservatives skin crawl. "Bleeding heart liberal" if you will....
But I'm a volunteer FF/EMT (it's all volunteer here), and I too have seen some heavy heavy shit. And while I'd be lying if I said none of it ever bothered me, I've never shed a single tear over it.
Quote: SOOPOOI paid off my student loans as soon as I could, maybe 5 years after I became an attending physician. I hate debt, perhaps irrationally so. I don't think I am creative enough, or entrepreneurial enough, to be a table games designer. And I wouldn't like the pay cut......
As far as my empathy level, how about you and I make a bet as to how many times I have cried with patients and their families compared to a similar event for you?
I understand your valid point that healthcare costs, IF UNINSURED, are quite variable compared to food, housing, water, etc. The number of people that can afford Apple watches, Big Bertha drivers, 70 inch TV's, $3000 bankroll for Vegas trip, etc. that are UNINSURED is striking. Why are they uninsured? Because they cannot afford it! Healthcare insurance IS FREE for those that the government has deemed cannot afford it (Medicaid). What you and I are arguing about is what we should do about those who can afford it but choose not to afford it. I propose that many more can afford it, just it would make them change their lifestyle, and they would prefer the government (meaning 'others' through their tax dollars) subsidize them. You neglected to acknowledge my point about if you earn 60k consider it 50k with health insurance included.
I worked last night. I took care of a gentleman shot 4 times. I can assure you he had no Health Insurance. He got the same exact care that a Blue Cross patient would have gotten. Lack of Health Insurance is not lack of Health Care.
Well, since becoming a casino game designer would require a pay cut then may I suggest that Paigondan and Paradigm should consider changing their career to become a brain surgeon or pathologist…
You have a very valid point about the irresponsibility of many. The lack of responsibility occurs at ALL level of society – from the powerful to the powerless, from the haves to the have-nots, from the richest to the poorest… Yes, there are leeches in our society at ALL levels, but they should not stop us from striving to become a better human and to make our society better.
Healthcare and/or health insurance can be very complex -- politically, humanly, and capitalistically; and it is not as black and white as you believe. I wish I have a solution to our current health care/insurance crisis. But repealing the ACA/Obamacare without a replacement plan in place is both irresponsible and inhumane..
You complain about those who can afford it but choose not to afford it is legitimate. The current ACA has an insurance mandate provision, and if properly enforce would alleviate concern. But unfortunately the enforcement of this mandate was very difficult due to political reason. What is your solution to FORCING (NO, IT CAN’T BE VOLUNTARY) the irresponsible become responsible with regarding to health care/insurance? Since you and I, and our society won’t let the uninsured patients die, or won’t refuse care to uninsured patients, would then some form of a very severe penalty, or a mandate requiring health insurance be a reasonable course of action?
Edit:
One example of a well-known, powerful and rich leech is president-elect, racist, sexist, and rapist Trump. His admitted leeches were all LEGAL. And for Trumpers, please don't ask me to provide link because I know you are all aware of his many "leeches"
Quote: 777Well, since becoming a casino game designer would require a pay cut then may I suggest that Paigondan and Paradigm should consider changing their career to become a brain surgeon or pathologist…
You have a very valid point about the irresponsibility of many. The lack of responsibility occurs at ALL level of society – from the powerful to the powerless, from the haves to the have-nots, from the richest to the poorest… Yes, there are leeches in our society at ALL levels, but they should not stop us from striving to become a better human and to make our society better.
Healthcare and/or health insurance can be very complex -- politically, humanly, and capitalistically; and it is not as black and white as you believe. I wish I have a solution to our current health care/insurance crisis. But repealing the ACA/Obamacare without a replacement plan in place is both irresponsible and inhumane..
You complain about those who can afford it but choose not to afford it is legitimate. The current ACA has an insurance mandate provision, and if properly enforce would alleviate concern. But unfortunately the enforcement of this mandate was very difficult due to political reason. What is your solution to FORCING (NO, IT CAN’T BE VOLUNTARY) the irresponsible become responsible with regarding to health care/insurance? Since you and I, and our society won’t let the uninsured patients die, or won’t refuse care to uninsured patients, would then some form of a very severe penalty, or a mandate requiring health insurance be a reasonable course of action?
Edit:
One example of a well-known, powerful and rich leech is president-elect, racist, sexist, and rapist Trump. His admitted leeches were all LEGAL. And for Trumpers, please don't ask me to provide link because I know you are all aware of his many "leeches"
Quote: 777What is your solution to FORCING (NO, IT CAN’T BE VOLUNTARY) the irresponsible become responsible with regarding to health care/insurance? Since you and I, and our society won’t let the uninsured patients die, or won’t refuse care to uninsured patients, would then some form of a very severe penalty, or a mandate requiring health insurance be a reasonable course of action?
One solution that has worked out has been with vehicle insurance, the creation of high-risk pools.
Care to cite any specifics or is this just another wild-eyed assertion?Quote: 777One example of a well-known, powerful and rich leech is president-elect, . . . rapist Trump.
Quote: gamerfreakInteresting. I consider myself an extreamly empathetic to a lot of different groups. Poor people, immigrants, addicts. The sort of people that make conservatives skin crawl. "Bleeding heart liberal" if you will....
But I'm a volunteer FF/EMT (it's all volunteer here), and I too have seen some heavy heavy shit. And while I'd be lying if I said none of it ever bothered me, I've never shed a single tear over it.
You, as an EMT, see the same 'shit' I do, just it gets cleaned up a bit usually before I have to get involved. The cases I see that make me 'cry' the most are the previously healthy regular folk who sustain a cervical spine injury resulting in quadriplegia. A week ago I had a guy about to go for a spine fusion a day after his injury ask me if recovery was 'around 5 days?' (Highly unlikely he ever regains significant function) He had two relatives in the room, who he could not see. They knew he was in denial and were holding back tears.
And, seriously, again, you should be very proud of yourself to be a VOLUNTEER FF/EMT. I help train EMTs in intubating at my hospital.
Quote: SOOPOOThe number of people that can afford Apple watches, Big Bertha drivers, 70 inch TV's, $3000 bankroll for Vegas trip, etc. that are UNINSURED is striking. Why are they uninsured? Because they cannot afford it! Healthcare insurance IS FREE for those that the government has deemed cannot afford it (Medicaid). What you and I are arguing about is what we should do about those who can afford it but choose not to afford it. I propose that many more can afford it, just it would make them change their lifestyle, and they would prefer the government (meaning 'others' through their tax dollars) subsidize them. You neglected to acknowledge my point about if you earn 60k consider it 50k with health insurance included.
No doubt. But people right here, have said they don't like someone forcing them to buy something even if they can afford it.
I get the part where they want to be free, but as far as health costs it doesn't make a lot of sense to do it that way, to only let people pay when they're good and ready. First they may miscalculate and have no insurance when something seriously expensive happens, second, it does little to help get costs down.
Quote: 777
Edit:
One example of a well-known, powerful and rich leech is president-elect, racist, sexist, and rapist Trump.
I don't post much here, but I do enjoy
reading all the sore loser posts. I hope
you keep it up for the next 4 years.
Every time Trump accomplishes
something, jump up and down and scream
and hold your breath till you turn blue.
Very entertaining. For Trump to be
successful would be the final slap in the
face for the I'm With Her crowd.
Quote: 777
Healthcare and/or health insurance can be very complex -- politically, humanly, and capitalistically; and it is not as black and white as you believe. I wish I have a solution to our current health care/insurance crisis. But repealing the ACA/Obamacare without a replacement plan in place is both irresponsible and inhumane..
You complain about those who can afford it but choose not to afford it is legitimate. The current ACA has an insurance mandate provision, and if properly enforce would alleviate concern. But unfortunately the enforcement of this mandate was very difficult due to political reason. What is your solution to FORCING (NO, IT CAN’T BE VOLUNTARY) the irresponsible become responsible with regarding to health care/insurance? Since you and I, and our society won’t let the uninsured patients die, or won’t refuse care to uninsured patients, would then some form of a very severe penalty, or a mandate requiring health insurance be a reasonable course of action?
Believe it or not, I do not think the ACA will be totally repealed and replaced, but parts of it will. As what actually should have happened from the beginning, the entire ACA should have been subject to analysis (not--- "well I didn't actually read it but we had to pass something"). Certain parts will stay.... age 26 coverage.... pre-existing condditions.... Many wont. I do not have a problem with a mandate to have health insurance. There is a mandate to have auto insurance. I am mandated to have malpractice insurance (if I want to work). I think the fines imposed were meant to 'force' people to get health insurance, but were just way too low. Make the fines substantial and they will work.
Quote: SOOPOOYou, as an EMT, see the same 'shit' I do, just it gets cleaned up a bit usually before I have to get involved. The cases I see that make me 'cry' the most are the previously healthy regular folk who sustain a cervical spine injury resulting in quadriplegia. A week ago I had a guy about to go for a spine fusion a day after his injury ask me if recovery was 'around 5 days?' (Highly unlikely he ever regains significant function) He had two relatives in the room, who he could not see. They knew he was in denial and were holding back tears.
And, seriously, again, you should be very proud of yourself to be a VOLUNTEER FF/EMT. I help train EMTs in intubating at my hospital.
I can definitely see that. Once care is transferred to the ER, that is pretty much the end of the story for us. Very seldom do we get any kind of followup or learn about outcomes. Occasionally at trauma symposiums, or a the rare cardiac arrest survivor coming in to thank us.
And thanks for the compliment! Speaking of intubation, thats a no-go for EMT's here, it was a fight with the state to even get Narcan. Paramedics can, who I guess are called EMT-A's in a lot of areas. I've heard of a new tube that might change that though. It splits into 2 tubes so you hit both the trachea and the esophagus, then you cap the esophageal tube. I think that's how it works at least, I guess that makes it less risky?
Quote: gamerfreakI can definitely see that. Once care is transferred to the ER, that is pretty much the end of the story for us. Very seldom do we get any kind of followup or learn about outcomes. Occasionally at trauma symposiums, or a the rare cardiac arrest survivor coming in to thank us.
And thanks for the compliment! Speaking of intubation, thats a no-go for EMT's here, it was a fight with the state to even get Narcan. Paramedics can, who I guess are called EMT-A's in a lot of areas. I've heard of a new tube that might change that though. It splits into 2 tubes so you hit both the trachea and the esophagus, then you cap the esophageal tube. I think that's how it works at least, I guess that makes it less risky?
I'll send you a PM. Discussing intubation during an election thread is quite a derail!
The fact that the opposition had, to say the least, unenthusiastic support, had nothing to do with her loss, of course. Nor did the Democratic National Committee's refusal to cooperate with the F.B.I. on the email problem.Quote: 777No, Obama was not the reason. The FBI, Russian, fake news, and the lack of common decency of Trumpers are contributing factors to the making the racist, sexist and rapist president-elect Trump.
We don't need more table games designers, we need more physicians. As they say, don't quit your day job. However, even though we don't need more table games designers, we do need more entrepreneurs. As I've mentioned before, the employer-centric health insurance scheme in this country is an artificial impediment to starting a small business or solo practice. That scheme originated from the tax subsidies that employers receive from covering their employees, and it made sense when the U.S. economy was more firmly rooted in large-employer industries. But we've moved past that stage of our economic development toward one in which there are more demands for freelancers and small businesses, especially those serving newer industries. To wit: you would have been able to be a doctor had you been born 50 years earlier. My career didn't exist then. I strongly believe that a secondary effect of guaranteed, portable health insurance coverage will be growth in the entrepreneurial class, which will then spawn additional jobs in support industries. I believe that we should be doing everything we can to encourage entrepreneurship and risk-taking because small business is a significant growth engine for our economy. Tearing down the artificial barrier that is job-centric health coverage, a policy that discourages entrepreneurs from leaving their cushy corporate jobs and starting their own businesses, is (to me) an obvious step to take.Quote: SOOPOOI paid off my student loans as soon as I could, maybe 5 years after I became an attending physician. I hate debt, perhaps irrationally so. I don't think I am creative enough, or entrepreneurial enough, to be a table games designer. And I wouldn't like the pay cut......
That's only if you pay for the insurance up front. If you pay for healthcare as you need it, your own out-of-pocket costs may be lower but the net financial cost to society is higher. That's what Obama was trying to avoid with the mandate and guaranteed coverage. You can't have guaranteed coverage without some cost-sharing or mandates, it's just not financially viable. Everyone who's being honest understands this. Obama certainly does. He gave an interview to Vox about the future of Obamacare. He doesn't come off as someone who's just winging it and hoping for the best. He appears to have tried his hardest to make healthcare policy better for Americans:Quote:You neglected to acknowledge my point about if you earn 60k consider it 50k with health insurance included. I worked last night. I took care of a gentleman shot 4 times. I can assure you he had no Health Insurance. He got the same exact care that a Blue Cross patient would have gotten. Lack of Health Insurance is not lack of Health Care.
Quote: President ObamaLet me start from a very simple premise: If it works, I’m for it.
If something can cover all Americans and make sure if they have a preexisting condition, they can still get coverage. Make sure prescription drugs are affordable. Encourage preventive measures to keep people healthy. Make sure that in rural communities, people have access to substance abuse care, or mental health care. That Medicare and Medicaid continue to function effectively. If you can do all of that cheaper than we talked about, cheaper than Obamacare achieves, and with better quality and it’s just terrific — I’m for it.
...
And now is the time when Republicans have to go ahead and show their cards. If in fact they have a program that would genuinely work better, and they want to call it whatever they want — they can call it Trumpcare or McConnellcare or Ryancare — if it actually works, I will be the first one to say, “Great; you should have told me that in 2009. I asked.”
I suspect that will not happen. And the reason it will not happen is because if you want to provide coverage to people, there are certain baseline things you’ve got to do.
Number one: Health care is not cheap. And for those who can’t afford it or can’t get it through the job, that means the government has got to pay some money.
Number two: All those provisions that the Republicans say they want to keep and that they like — for example, making sure people can get health insurance even if they have a preexisting condition — it turns out the only way to meet that guarantee is to either make sure everyone has some modest obligation to get health care, so they’re not gaming the system, or you’ve got to provide huge subsidies to the insurance companies so they’re taking in people who are already sick.
...
They have said absolutely, adamantly, that they can do it better. I am saying to every Republican right now: “If you can in fact put a plan together that is demonstrably better than what Obamacare is doing, I will publicly support repealing Obamacare and replacing it with your plan.”
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/1/6/14193334/obama-vox-interview-transcript
He knows better than I about the numbers who disfavor Obamacare coming from both sides, conservative on one side opposing the mandate and demanding the free market, socialist on the other side demanding single-payer. I personally think single payer is the right solution because the secondary and tertiary effects on the economy are worth it, but nobody with any influence is looking at secondary or tertiary effects. It doesn't need to be single payer either as long as the coverage is guaranteed and portable (and I don't mean COBRA, don't talk to me about COBRA). But we have too many large corporations lobbying for their continued ability to use health benefits as a lever in their jobs competition, so it will continue to be the little guys (like me) who get left out in the cold. I'm paying rack rate for medical insurance, I get no breaks at all. It's worth it to me. I know that now because I'm already successful, but I didn't know it at the time I started my business. In my opinion, our government should remove the health coverage risk as a factor in the choice between staying at a job and starting a business.
Quote: SOOPOODiscussing intubation during an election thread is quite a derail!
Oh, I don't know, some people here may not be getting enough oxygen to the brain. It's hard to tell sometimes.
Quote: MathExtremistHowever, even though we don't need more table games designers, we do need more entrepreneurs. As I've mentioned before, the employer-centric health insurance scheme in this country is an artificial impediment to starting a small business or solo practice. That scheme originated from the tax subsidies that employers receive from covering their employees, and it made sense when the U.S. economy was more firmly rooted in large-employer industries. But we've moved past that stage of our economic development toward one in which there are more demands for freelancers and small businesses, especially those serving newer industries. To wit: you would have been able to be a doctor had you been born 50 years earlier. My career didn't exist then. I strongly believe that a secondary effect of guaranteed, portable health insurance coverage will be growth in the entrepreneurial class, which will then spawn additional jobs in support industries. I believe that we should be doing everything we can to encourage entrepreneurship and risk-taking because small business is a significant growth engine for our economy. Tearing down the artificial barrier that is job-centric health coverage, a policy that discourages entrepreneurs from leaving their cushy corporate jobs and starting their own businesses, is (to me) an obvious step to take.
But we have too many large corporations lobbying for their continued ability to use health benefits as a lever in their jobs competition, so it will continue to be the little guys (like me) who get left out in the cold. I'm paying rack rate for medical insurance, I get no breaks at all. It's worth it to me. I know that now because I'm already successful, but I didn't know it at the time I started my business. In my opinion, our government should remove the health coverage risk as a factor in the choice between staying at a job and starting a business.
This 200% sums up my concerns, thank you.
I'm 25 and currently running my own show solo and doing alright. I have a close friend who is 27 and started a manufacturing business in a thought to be dead industry to about ~$500k in 2 years. There are several people similar to us that have realize they can make a solid $60k-$100k for themselves with 0 to a couple dozen employees. But we needed to be treated the same, or at least similar, to big corps when it comes to areas like healthcare.
And speaking of new industries, it's also disturbing to me when Republicans talk about globalization like it it's Communism in the 1950's. For industries like manufacturing - sure. Build the biggest baddest wall you can imagine, and it's maybe possible you'll accomplish something. But I promise you will never ever block the 1's and 0's coming over from China, Russia, India, etc. Some industries need to compete in a global market and there is no way around that.
Tell them to take 2,000 or 3,000 units of epogen to increase their hemoglobin. Worked for Lance Armstong.Quote: rxwineOh, I don't know, some people here may not be getting enough oxygen to the brain. It's hard to tell sometimes.
Quote: 777No, Obama was not the reason. The FBI, Russian, fake news, and the lack of common decency of Trumpers are contributing factors to the making the racist, sexist and rapist president-elect Trump.
When one is grasping for straws, I imagine, it doesn't matter what color one ends up with. Your empty hands speak volumes.
Quote: gamerfreakSure. There's this just for starters. But I know you've seen it.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8wM248Wo54U
Yeah, I've seen that video before. But I think you posted the wrong link, I couldn't find any proof or self admission of Trump being racist, sexist, nor a rapist.
Quote: 777You can find it here:
https://www.google.com/search?q=get+your+head+out+of+the+sand&biw=1131&bih=853&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjUkaCI57LRAhVhxoMKHSrmChIQsAQIIA
And here is a bonus point for Trumpers:
https://www.google.com/search?q=RS+dreaming+of+babe&biw=1131&bih=853&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwimzNax6bLRAhXnhlQKHcSDD0kQ_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=RS+%2B+sexy+babe&imgrc=PvDHoPARcQx5TM%3A
https://www.google.com/search?q=RS+dreaming+of+babe&biw=1131&bih=853&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwimzNax6bLRAhXnhlQKHcSDD0kQ_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=RS+%2B+sexy+babe
When ya got nothing to substantiate your claims, tell the other to get his head out of the sand.
Quote: RSYeah, I've seen that video before. But I think you posted the wrong link, I couldn't find any proof or self admission of Trump being racist, sexist, nor a rapist.
Strange must be loading a different vid for you on youtube. Here is an un-edited part of the transcript for your reference instead:
Quote: TranscriptTrump: Yeah, that’s her. With the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.
Bush: Whatever you want.
Trump: Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.
