Sticker shock protection bill would be AWESOME! Make them spend one year in prison for every Billion that they misrepresent a bill for, which is actually pretty soft when you consider Bernie Maddoff. That's one of the best ideas I've ever heard. It would make them take this seriously and just maybe, they would stop lying to us when they look us in the eye.
Well, they need SOME kind of punishment when this blows up in everyones' face...Have you read the OFFICIAL numbers on the waiting-lines in Canada?
And more immediately, have you stood in line at a pharmacy or ER?
The Congressmen don't have to, they get protected from the consequences of their actions, so they don't care if those consequences turn out to be negative!
This is Ringo's Law in action, "Everything Government touches turns to crap." They have no common sense. . . they have no clue as to real economics (I'm just a truck driver, not an Economist, and I have more of a clue. . . as do most Americans). True Health Care Reform? Sit down, shut up.
Obama has already cut the most important part out of Obamacare: He has promised Big Pharma that he will NOT try to negotiate lower prices on medicines, which is arguably the most expensive part of the medi-business combine. I've seen REALLY old women drop a GRAND on a single bottle of heart-meds!
Plus, there's a codicil in it that tries to determine "worth" of more expensive procedures based on the person's INCOME, rather than WHAT they actually do!
Plus, Obama's memory loss is getting worse. He "forgot" that most of the uninsured are ILLEGALS who come here to "get one over" on us. Clinton signed into law that hospitals HAVE to treat anyone, regardless of legal status, or their capability/intention of paying. So illegals enter the ER, get patched up, and leave without paying!
The cost of this "free" care is passed on to people who actually EXIST, and can be tracked down and FORCED to pay!
And Healthcare is a different situation. As Glenn Beck noted (yes that Con whack job) when he was in the hospital, his doctor gave him the most expensive treatment available precisely because Beck's insurance would cover it. The question is: Is that for the sake of the bottom line, or natural human inclination because "someone else" is paying for it. I believe it's the former. As for barriers, the economies of scale are a natural barrier, for example, preventing under-cutting on drug prices.
"his doctor gave him the most expensive treatment available precisely because Beck's insurance would cover it."
What the fuck does that have to do with anything, other than proving my point that government regulation enables companies to engage in undesirable business practices?
You keep mentioning "natural barriers" that supposedly exist in markets rife with regulation. The point is whizzing over your head. Why is this so difficult for you to grasp?
The doctor giving him the most expensive treatment available because his insurance would cover it (if you have Cadillac insurance you get Cadillac care) proves GOVERNMENT intervention?? The gov't told him doctor to do it? The gov't told his insurance company to cover it?? The doctor had a choice as to what to prescribe (in this instance) but did not make a consumer choice. He made another kind...You are the one that refuses to discuss any points that interfere with your one-sided viewpoint.
What are you not understanding here? Because of government regulation, the doctor is able to prescribe the most expensive surgery. How is that not obvious? I'm sick of repeating myself over and over again. That's why I have a fucking attitude, dipshit.
Your attitude is because someone is challenging you. If ya really wanted the best for America you would do away w/ attitude & explain exactly where and how there's a gov't regulation that facilitates expensive treatment, or encourages doctors to go for the expensive tests, or for that matter hospitals to not bundle their charges... Just stating your conclusion and then calling me a name. All your posts are like that. When I asked you to explain your view: "pulling random numbers out of your ass"
There is no answer contained in your post. You have not even attempted to answer the question. At this point, you will probably obfuscate further. Explain, don't insult, explain, how does a Doctor choosing the most expensive treatment = evidence of a gov't regulation?
And stop the fucking attitude like "WTF does this have to do with anything?" I'm an American too, and this is my fucking country. I get off my but and go door to door and campaign to get what I want done. You do not have a monopoly on being an American and its time people like you grew some balls and learned to respect Americans, because you claim that you love this country but NOT THE PEOPLE IN IT UNLESS THEY AGREE WITH YOU. What kind of an asshole is that? Comfirmation only? Go Listen to Rush.
OBAMA is our legitemate president ,,,,ALL YOU PEOPLE CALLING HIM BARRY,,CALLING HIM SOCIALIST, ALL YOU BIRTHERS ARE RACISTS ,,WE KNOW WHATS REALLY BEHIND THIS UGLINESS,!!!\,RACISM !!! JOKER IS VERY RACIST!!! AND YOU KNOW IT !!BUT YOU ARE ALL TO STUPID TO REALIZE IT ,ARE YOU UNDER THE IMPRESSION RACISM IS OK?( IT ISINT, WE ARE GOING TO START CALLING YOU OUT and your neighbors will all know your ugly secret .AND OUR VOICES WILL BE HEARD,RACISM ISINT PART OF MY AMERICA,,YOU PEOPLE MAKE ME SICK
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
we also elected obama BECAUSE WE WANTED HEALTHCARE FOR ALL!!!HE IS DOING EXACTLY WHAT WE ELECTED HIM TO DO,,, THINK ABOUT IT HE RAN ON THIS HEALTHCARE FOR ALL PLATFORM,,AMERICA VOTED HIM IN THE LARGEST MANDATE IN 30 YEARS,,AMERICA WANTS THIS ,,,WE VOTED FOR IT,,THOSE THAT OPPOSE IT REPRESENT A FRINGE MINORITY VIEW,,,,
ok here in florida we had the same problem with home insurance,, high rates and companys refusing to cover anyone, state of florida created citizens ,,a govt run option !!!private home insurance...scince that time rates have fallen and more people are covered than ever,, very succesful!!
the compEtition forced the other companys to lower rates and accept more people,,they did not go out of business..i use the citizens my neighbor dosent,,,,EVERYTHING IS STILL OK
How about American citizen push back not republican. I am a union member against this legislation. So they want to get the insurance company out from between my Dr and my care. Well I can CHANGE my insurance company if I do not like the services they provide. How Do I ever get the ObamaCare out of MY health care? You Can't! Once they have their fingers in your life they never get out. How about those Gov run VA hospitals? I know vets that say its the worst health care there is.
How did we get to the point where $1 trillion in 10 years is considered a "cheap estimate"? I guess people just hear it so much they don't even care anymore, kind of like war.
represents less costs per person than private insurance companies especially since they generally make it a policy to deny people health care treatment if they have pre existing conditions.
also does anyone thing the claims and points made in I.O.U.S.A. are factual and true?
I happen to think so, but I may be wrong.
That documentary film seems to make a strong assertion in the possible direction of a public plan to counter to horrendous burden of health care costs.
if people are worried about price, then I want to ask which will cost more: having the federal government provide a public option for health care treatment
or
private insurance companies charging people for health care treatment?
(keep in mind the public option proposed by Congress would NOT eliminate or put out of business those wonderful insurance companies that pay (sometimes) for Americans health care costs)
I'm more inclined that the government, regardless of how much it would cost
Not to worry . . . . the private insurers won't last long if we get nationalized health care. Why should employers keep providing health care benefits when they can unload their employees onto the national plan? BTW, it will be a national health *rationing* plan. This is another power grab by Liberals to get more money flowing through Washington so they can control more of the economy. I don't think it has a lot to do with "health."
If we don't slow the spending we are looking at a longggg recession ,no jobs , etc etc. Wait hey maybe Americans and that free market thing can come back some day?
I think Glenn Beck is doing the job Rush Limbaugh just won't do? And that is to tell the truth that Republicans may need to be opposed for not standing up for the constitution.
We need people like Rush Limbaugh to influence donors to leave the Republican party for the Libertarian party. I am not one of these people who think that their is not a dimes worth of difference in the 2 parties but on government spending take the party identities away and try to tell me the difference. You know the Federalists and Whigs were once parties in the United States. We need the RNC and DNC afraid of ending up like them.
AS a health care professional, and as someone who has read that ginormous bill, it is by far the worst thing I have ever read in my entire life. It IS the take over of the private sector. Instead of tax deductions to provide care from your business, they will be taxed unless they provide you with the govt plan. Anyone with "inadequate" coverage will be taxed (ie. high deductible HSA plans). Cancer patients, special needs patients, and elderly will be rationed care.
It will cover the sticker shock treatment; but you will have to be placed on a waiting list and it will be a number of months before receiving treatment. In addition if you are over the age of 65 you will just be given pain killers as it wouldnt be economical for you to receive the full treatment.
I wonder daily, are our politicians really this stupid or are they deliberately trying to destroy our country, or do special interest groups buy them off so they just don't give a FUCK about the U.S. citizens?
we cannot afford it, and it will create socialized medicine. no company will provide their employees with health care if the government will do it for free... the premium won't cover the costs of the care... it's a fucking disaster waiting to happen
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Actually, we can't afford not to confront the industry where costs go up 10% every year. It's now at 18% of GDP where most developed countries are at 6 to 8. Also other countries have hybrid systems (not like Canada) offering a choice and rich people can buy out (so that takes care of the innovation argument). The money going into the pubic agency will be less thanwhat we're paying in premiums. Again, you can't negotiate when it comes to life and limb - healthcare is not a commodity.
your right so lets make it a government program... because the tax revenue is at it's lowest since the great depression... that will cut costs and we'll all be healthy and happy...
"Actually, we can't afford not to confront the industry where costs go up 10% every year."
While you're stating that, Ben Bernanke is talking up the merits of inflation and doing his Fed duty to prevent deflation at any cost.
In case you didn't understand- and given that you're claiming people actually want this health care plan, I'm assuming you didn't- that means that the cost of everything will continue to increase as long as the Fed exists.
Furthermore, I'm absolutely dumbfounded that you think introducing government into the equation will somehow make things cheaper. It doesn't work that way. When you decide to take money from point A to point B by way of points C through Z, you're guaranteed to lose a whole lot along the way. That's all the government really does: it takes your money and decides where to spend it (instead of letting you do it yourself), and skims off the tops as it doles it out.
Health care is an economic issue. If we didn't have government interfering, the market would have solved this problem decades ago. Government only solves problems when it gets lucky; most of the time, it just creates more problems. But hey, even a broken clock shows the right time twice a day, right?
Aha, you know who else is dumbfounded? The Germans (public option with private healthcare), the French, The Australians (small waiting times), the Canadians (don't favor this particular system but theirs IS cheaper) the Swiss, the Japanese, the Tiawanese, the Swedish, the Costa Ricans (!). They're dumbfounded that somehow they're healthcare is cheaper....very dumbfounding....
Their health care is not cheaper. Do you have any fucking clue how much they pay in taxes? Why don't you ask someone from one of those countries how much they love their health care? All the Europeans I've talked to described very poor experiences.
A)Only part of their taxes go to healthcare B) As expressed by percentage of GDP means the money that the country spends anyway. Those who went Medically bankrupt yet still possessed insurance (gaps in coverage) spent on average $9,000 less than those who didn't have coverage. They still payed out of pocket. C)You're trading a private price tag for a public one, but the cost is still there. Don't forget, the externalities are always passed on to the taxpayer.
What the fuck are you babbling about? You claimed that government health care would be cheaper. You even made some cryptic remark about how not having any choice but to pay isn't a market. Now you're telling me "externalities" are passed on to the taxpayer. You're not making any sense here.
Do you know what GDP is? I'll give you a hint: it's not how much money the country spends.
How exactly is the US supposed to borrow money when it's already $12 trillion in debt?
The money wouldn't be borrowed 1)You'd be spending what you're spending on premiums except a lot less.2) The rich would pay a little more. I know, that's the crux, isn't it? Making the rich pay more is just awful...
"Not having any choice" You don't have a choice, inelastic demand. If a doctor wants to charge you $85,000 it's called healthcare. If a mobster does it, it's called A PROTECTION RACKET.
Taxes are enforced via extortion. Also, it's not actually a racket unless the doctor breaks/threatens to break your kneecaps then demands $85,000 to fix them.
Wow, you're both full of shit. Inflation does have an effect on everything, it's just a matter of degree and is not the sole determinant.
Also, a big part of the explanation for that $85,000 healthcare is because of market distortions by the government itself, such as huge tax breaks and other regulations that really only end up benefiting the rich (who would buy healthcare anyway) the most. In other words, the externality would not be as large.
"Inflation does have an effect on everything, it's just a matter of degree and is not the sole determinant."
I never said it was. Zakdayak repeatedly insisted that inflation had nothing to do with rising health care costs, and I simply stated that it did because inflation affects the cost of everything.
You're absolutely correct, current health care regulations are a huge reason why it's so expensive.
And even though an externality would still exist, it does not mean that the government has to repair it as non profits and charities could still cover the cost. One big flaw I've found in public finance is that there is always the assumption that the government won't piss the money away.
So there you go,, if you want to talk in economics terms, that 85 k is caused by a rightward shift of healthcare demand comprised of the rich thanks to good old gov't and lack of supply shift by the same thing.
Shady, if you're saying that the gov't doesn't always have to fix an externality, that's probably correct. As for "pissed away" the point is not to have that and get them to spend on what matters. After all, no one would suggest we scrap the Police because of corruption scandals, or the military because of $10k toilet seats. As for market distortion, what are you talking about - our healthcare system = private gain. You cannot get healthcare unless you go to war (VA) or buy into the system.
And that's my point, the poor were crowded out because the inelastic demand curve shifted to the right caused by terrible government incentives that favor the rich (or those that work for a company with benefits( this screws the labor market too)) and a very inelastic supply curve caused by the same thing.
Healthcare used to be much, much cheaper than it is today and buying into the system was not too hard, our current condition isn't due to coincidence,.
If the police were acting as a mafia, it it would certainly be better to have the free rider problem and a mafia that we didn't fund through public money. If the military paid the same way for every single thing (not just toilet seats) they bought to a certain point, then the same amount of protection would probably be achievable with the private solution. Never say never, because I bet even you would suggest the same under those circumstances it it got bad enough.
Oh, I forgot to mention, there is no such thing as a free rider problem with health care, so it's a terrible example to use in trying to counter my argument either way.
"After all, no one would suggest we scrap the Police because of corruption scandals, or the military because of $10k toilet seats."
Actually, they would, if they were smart, because they would realize that private corporations could provide the same service at a reduced cost. There's no reason that those services need be provided by government.
I know what "externality" means. I don't know what specifics you're referring to though, as you consistently use vague language and make blanket statements without backing anything up, like this one:
"You'd be spending what you're spending on premiums except a lot less."
The rich would pay more? Great, since you're not fucking rich, right? Why the hell should the rich be able to keep what they earn? They're rich, they can afford it.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
787: The 10% rise in Healthcare has NOTHING to do with any normal cyclical market mechanism. Inflation has been low for several years (except in non fuctioning markets like oil) In anycase the 10% has nothing to do with the Fed. And the Fed is a private consortium. So WTF? The cost of healthcare is far lower where insurance companies, Hospitals, and Pharma have incentives to decrease costs. Here the opposite is true, that's why it goes up. It's not a market when you have no choice but to pay.
"The 10% rise in Healthcare has NOTHING to do with any normal cyclical market mechanism"
Oh, you got that right. Inflation is not a "normal market mechanism" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean), but it's got everything to do with the price of anything going up... obviously.
"Inflation has been low for several years"
Now you are just pulling things out of your ass.
"And the Fed is a private consortium."
So that makes it okay? I don't see the point here.
"The cost of healthcare is far lower where insurance companies, Hospitals, and Pharma have incentives to decrease costs."
Duh. You know what the best incentive is? Competition in a free market. Government involvement eliminates that. That is why costs keep going up. This will only make that worse (the government doesn't have to compete with anyone).
"It's not a market when you have no choice but to pay."
Genius, health care is not free, whether the government provides it or not.
And ironically enough, having the government provide anything FORCES taxpayers to pay for it whether they want it or not. You're right, that's no market, that's fucking extortion.
NO. Inflation does not explain why everything goes up in price. For example Healthcare has nonelastic demand. And anything going up 10% would have nothing to do with inflation (I'm well aware of the Fed's game of debt-based $) since the rate of inflation is much lower and despite interest rates being at 0 there is no lending going on so that's not it either - we're in a deflationary cycle, yet healthcare still goes up. You haven't a clue what you're talking about, like the Fed being private.
"Inflation does not explain why everything goes up in price."
Actually, it does. Prices continue to increase as inflation does. That is why everything was much cheaper 5 decades ago than it is today.
We're in a deflationary cycle? Good lord, either you don't know what deflation is, or you live with your head firmly implanted in your asshole. You don't spend $12 trillion that you don't have without causing inflation.
What exactly did I say about the Fed that was incorrect?
I should also add that there are a number of models present. So for example, America will never be Sweden. We will never have taxes that high...but it's not necessary...you borrow what works. Ask the Germans or the Swiss who have private insurance companies.
No, it does not. Gas prices go up and down independent of inflation. And inflation is not 10% every year. What the fuck man? Why are you arguing the flat/young-earth creationist kind of crap on this. Inflation is not 10%! Don't be fucking ridiculous. In fact, in 2006 alone healthcare premiums went up more than TWICE the rate of inflation. That year premiums went up 7.7% which was a 78% increase in 6 fucking years! Also, overhead can go up without inflation -ad costs for insurance companies.
"Gas prices go up and down independent of inflation."
Then why hasn't it gone back down to a dollar a gallon? INFLATION. Gas prices fluctuate, duh, as does the price of anything. Average it out and over the decades, you can clearly see the price increasing. This isn't rocket science, it's basic math.
"Inflation is not 10%!"
I NEVER SAID IT WAS. You need to learn how to fucking read.
First , you're the one that's not reading. In 2006, premiums went up double the amount of inflation,sometimes the cost of healthcare goes up 10%. You blame this on inflation. So, ahem, YOU DID SAY THAT. I fail to see why gas has to go back to a dollar a gallon in order for you to acknowlege that it has increased out of step with inflation, when inflation is only 1 to 3% in recent years. In 2006 the inflation rate was 3.24%, insurance premiums went up 7.2%. Pharma markups are in the thous of %
No, I didn't blame it on inflation. Go back and quote the exact sentence where I said "healthcare goes up 10% solely due to inflation." Clearly, you're not comprehending the point I was making in bringing up inflation in the first place. Stop putting words in my mouth.
Gasoline prices don't directly track inflation, but neither does anything else, as supply and demand play a huge role, as does legislation. But the entire point is that you're complaining about increasing prices while the entity that controls our money is constantly inflating it. Prices will always continue to go up because of that. Even if health care is "fixed," and becomes cheaper, prices will continue to increase thanks to the Fed.
Why would it track inflation? Oil prices are a major CAUSE of inflation. You have it all fucking backwards. Unbelievable. What you're trying to say is that inflation + gov't regulation = Privatized system price hikes. The problem: It goes up every year regardless of regulation OR inflation. And when only ONE man's stock bonus can equal to $1 out of every $700 spent (3/4 of a BILLION dollars) and 30% out of every Healhcare dollar goes to corporate overhead like buying ads...Jesus, WAKE UP.
It could go either way actually, inflation could piss off OPEC and have them demand more dollars for the same quantity. In that case it would be inflation causing even more inflation, but for most cases you're right.
You're really wrongly dismissive of the degree that government regulation has in screwing with healthcare prices for those not included in the government plans. You also seem to like talking about the evils of corporatism, but what about the evils of bureaucracy?
There ARE evils of bureacracy, except 1) Gov't should be made accountable to people, and as long as we're in a democracy, that will be the case 2) Private bureacracy is only accountable to the investor class (and then only perhaps when owning preferred stock or a substantial stake). If you have a problem with Aetna, you can't go anywhere else other than government (well you could go to Michael Moore, but let's not go there). Their bureacracy is a threat at times to people's lives.
And there is where the problem lies. Gov't isn't accountable to the people. It's just good at manipulating the stupid masses when it is given the power to do so. Once it gains power, it has even greater leverage against those dependent of its programs to buy votes (this goes for both corps and individuals).
It's why we live in a constitutional republic and not a pure democracy. Democracy is overrated and can be as bad or worse than a dictatorship.
You're missing the explanatory factor (without getting into a philosophical discussion, although I'm puzzled that you imply a Con. Republic is better, isn't that what we have?) - what I mean by explanation is what motivates the government to trick the "stupid masses."
"and as long as we're in a democracy, that will be the case"
Right, because Bush was held accountable for starting a war that many of us didn't support.
Pipe dream. Democracy is simply another permutation of control.
"Private bureaucracy" (I'm assuming you mean private business) is accountable to the consumer. The drive for profit can only be fulfilled by giving the consumer the product that they want at the best price. Government, on the other hand, is accountable to no one.
"Accountable to the consumer." Boy you are really naive. That only happens when you're talking about a functional market with elastic demand. Here, many states have two or maybe even only one insurance provider. Most "consumers" don't shop for insurance and they certainly don't have negotiating power. My friend's mom was hospitalized for example and the Hospital asked for an outrageous amount. He managed to get it knocked off by a few g's. I mean, even then it was still like $7,000 for 4 days.
I can't even begin to make heads or tails of what you're talking about the way you throw around your words. Let me see if I can break it down in simpler terms:
In the US, we use these things called Federal Reserve notes (aka US dollars) to exchange goods and services. The value of these notes changes, and over the long term, it constantly decreases. This results in more notes to be used for the same product. Prices of all things go up. Do you get it now?
As far as regulation and prices go, prices become artificially higher the more government interferes in people's transactions. Those high health care costs you're complaining about are the result of both inflation and regulation. You pretty much had it. Inflation plus regulation equals greater cost of goods and services.
I guess you're not familiar with the term "barriers to entry"?
Thank you for the discussion on your concept of inflation. I dodn't really agree with this explantion, but that's not really relevant to our discussion. My point is that you cannot blame the Fed, or any other cause of inflation, for price hikes in Healthcare. Healthcare is expensive because people have little choice but to buy at inflated prices (what would you pay for a finger or a kidney?) and because of Corporate profits.
So you're saying I cant blame the federal reserve for inflation yet they're the ones printing the money and mass printing it so my money loses value? Are you that stupid? Thank you for proving that obama zombie federal reserve apologists dont know what they're talking about. Get back to worshiping obamas inflated ego like the shill you are.
No,I'm not saying you can't blame inflation on the Fed (in part anyway). I'm saying you can't blame risein healthcare costs on inflation. The whole discussion on inflation is nearly irrelevant. If you were to print a lot of money inflation would occur under normal conditions, but why are we discussing this now? Is it because you'd rather talk about your Grandmother's underwear than talk about a rather obvious thorn in the right-wing side: The cost of Healthcare in the US is out-fucking-rageous.
Of course you can, you need to take a class in basic economics. When your money loses value things cost more. Your money loses value due to inflation so in turn things cost more when the money supply is inflated. Inflation is completely relevant, again take a class in basic economics. The price of healthcare is so high in our country because our government inflates prices due to its involvement with the market. socializing healthcare in the US will only raise the cost even more.
"Thank you for proving that obama zombie federal reserve apologists ..." If it makes you feel better to insult people, by misrepresenting their opinion, I guess that's cool. The Fed policies are pro-inflation, but that usually happens through bank loans, credit cards, etc...in other words money is debt under that system. Deficit spending, since financed by borrowing and the paying of interest to those that own T-Bills, is income-redistrbution. I don't recall any of you mothers opposing that.
I'm not going to argue with an idiot that doesn't even know the basic principles of economics. Like inflating the money supply raises prices. Have a nice day.
You're right....about inflation...But the rise in Healthcare costs and premiums is not from inflation. So my expertise in that field is not relevant. I have already documented the large gulf between the rate inflation and healthcare cost increase.
Like I said its not just inflation that's driving up healthcare costs, that's only one of the factors. You need to factor in that government is also inflating the costs by interfering with markets dynamics, but to say that inflation isn't a large factor in the increase in costs is foolish.
OK, So let's keep it simple. Two guys check into the same hospital, with the same illness. Each stays 6 days. They stay in adjacent rooms and get the same treatments and tests. One is charged $7,000 and the other is charged $10,000 dollars. The only difference is in the first case the tests were "bundled." Is that the result of a gov't regulation? What does the "sovereign consumer" do?
Yes its a result of government regulation because they artificially make the prices higher through interfering with the market. One might pay more because he has a different insurance plan. One might not have insurance, because he doesn't want insurance, and just pays up all his medical bills upfront.
"One is charged $7,000 and the other is charged $10,000 dollars."
I fail to see any relevancy in you pulling random numbers out of your ass. You keep complaining about the high cost of health care, but what you can't seem to get through your head is that the reason health care is so high is because of government interference subsidizing certain practices and creating barriers to entry through regulation. If the health care industry were a free market, you wouldn't have those things.
The relevancy is this is exactly what HOSPITALS do. Your assertion about gov't regulation came after that of inflation. In other words, you didn't raise it until I pointed out factually that inflation was an inadequate explantion So now I'm trying to understand the role of "gov't regulation" by using a real-life example. Because 2 patients w/ same kind of room, same treatment, routinely get charged different amounts. I see that you produced some specficity "barriers to entry." WHY the barriers?
Because lobbyists want to ensure their company's stability in the marketplace by eliminating competition to increase profits. Do a search here on youtube for "barriers to entry."
Yes, there are barriers to entry into radio markets because private enterprise wants it that way. In healthcare though, an up and coming insurnce company would have to negotiate deals with hospitals, pharman, etc...there are already obstacles which certainly are not mandated by government. So, a new entry couldn't slash prices to attract new customers and would have to amass millions to pay off current claims.
How are those deals any different than deals that would have to be negotiated in radio? There's no difference. Both are providing a service. Both services are getting interference from government.
Costs of operations are not barriers to entry. Barriers to entry are artificial requirements created by government to disallow the entry of new competition. Higher cost operations simply mean that greater investment capital is required, that's all.
The deals I was referring to are private market barriers, not gov't mandated. You do not have a monopoly over words. Excessive costs or large capital investement are both known as barriers to every day entry. In LA for example, you can't break into the radio market without $300 million. That's a barrier. Gov't regulations on the radio industry have been taken down or ignored. And yet, it's gotten worse. Switching back to healthcare, in countries with a ton of regulation, costs are down.
The deals I was referring to are private market barriers, not gov't mandated. You do not have a monopoly over words. Excessive costs or large capital investement are both known as barriers to every day entry. In LA for example, you can't break into the radio market without $300 million. That's a barrier. Gov't regulations on the radio industry have been taken down or ignored. And yet, it's gotten worse. Switching back to healthcare, in countries with a ton of regulation, costs are down.
"The deals I was referring to are private market barriers, not gov't mandated. You do not have a monopoly over words. Excessive costs or large capital investement are both known as barriers to every day entry. In LA for example, you can't break into the radio market without $300 million. That's a barrier. Gov't regulations on the radio industry have been taken down or ignored. And yet, it's gotten worse. Switching back to healthcare, in countries with a ton of regulation, costs are down."
You're ass-backwards. When someone refers to "barriers to entry," they're talking about government regulations. Those excessive costs are created by regulations within the radio industry. Did you watch the video that I told you to watch?
You're either lying or uninformed if you think radio is free of regulations. To be honest, I surprised you'd have the balls to suggest something so blatantly false. There's even arguments over a new pending regulation requiring royalties.
Watched that vid before, and although well thought out, it misses a few things. If gov't tried to level the playing field, the Heritage Foundation, FEE, and the rest of the Ayn Rand freaks would scream bloody murder. Something like that happens inevitably with "laissez faire" capitalism. Because that's what it means IN PRACTICE. There are always regulations, the only difference is who benefits from them. I'd rather not protect the big money interests.
"The Fed policies are pro-inflation, but that usually happens through bank loans, credit cards, etc...in other words money is debt under that system. Deficit spending, since financed by borrowing and the paying of interest to those that own T-Bills, is income-redistrbution. I don't recall any of you mothers opposing that."
I'm trying to figure out a single reason why anyone in their right mind would actually want to support any of that. Yeah, money as debt sounds like a great idea.
In response to me talking about Healthcare increases you said: "While you're stating that, Ben Bernanke is talking up the merits of inflation and doing his Fed duty to prevent deflation at any cost...that means that the cost of everything will continue to increase as long as the Fed exists. "
This was your method of dismissing the private sector's increasing of costs. But since there's obviously a problem (in 2002, $ spent per privately insured person went up 9.6% for example) you backpedal
Don't backpedal and man-up. You know that costs are too high, but since you can't blame private interests, even though that's the system, you blamed it on inflation. "Bureacracy" didn't rear it's ugly head until I repeatedly pointed out that costs were out of step with that. That doesn't even mentioned the Thousands of dollars Hospitals routiney charge for stays. I did mention the Pharma mark-ups in the Thousands of % didn't I? It's a pure lunatic thing to blame this on inflation, my friend.
And finally, you tried to poke fun at my assertion of democracy, but you did not explain what motivates the lying. Who benefited from the Iraq war for example? Of course, I opposed it, protested it, called by senators to express my opposition, but such things are possible in any system of governement. However, thank you for confirming my suspicions as to what Right-wingers actually think about Democracy.
I'm not a "right-winger," I don't participate in your false dichotomy of an authority system. Try north and south on the political compass. Oh wait, you probably don't know what that is.
What motivates the lying? Greed. Are you saying that if government didn't exist, you'd lie and steal from other people? I don't think you'd last in society very long, if that's the case.
The only thing that keeps you in line is government? You sound like a religious person clutching to your Bible.
Holy shit, 2:04 would probably clear out all of Washington!!! It might even be worth making into law just for that fact alone! Sadly, that's probably why such a thing would NEVER get through the House or Senate...
Obama has no fucking idea what he's doing when it comes to his economy. Neither does anyone in his administration. They're all fucking idiots winging it as they go, because they haven't bothered to learn from history that you can't just keep printing money and racking up debt.
Sticker shock protection bill would be AWESOME! Make them spend one year in prison for every Billion that they misrepresent a bill for, which is actually pretty soft when you consider Bernie Maddoff. That's one of the best ideas I've ever heard. It would make them take this seriously and just maybe, they would stop lying to us when they look us in the eye.
sdfkjllshadflhadfshl 2 years ago
Well, they need SOME kind of punishment when this blows up in everyones' face...Have you read the OFFICIAL numbers on the waiting-lines in Canada?
And more immediately, have you stood in line at a pharmacy or ER?
The Congressmen don't have to, they get protected from the consequences of their actions, so they don't care if those consequences turn out to be negative!
EPGAH 2 years ago
This is Ringo's Law in action, "Everything Government touches turns to crap." They have no common sense. . . they have no clue as to real economics (I'm just a truck driver, not an Economist, and I have more of a clue. . . as do most Americans). True Health Care Reform? Sit down, shut up.
revdraco 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Watch Youtube video: The Health Care Bill: What they DON'T want you to know!
Stand UP & be heard! WE THE PEOPLE!
wethepeopleUSA2012 2 years ago
Obama has already cut the most important part out of Obamacare: He has promised Big Pharma that he will NOT try to negotiate lower prices on medicines, which is arguably the most expensive part of the medi-business combine. I've seen REALLY old women drop a GRAND on a single bottle of heart-meds!
Plus, there's a codicil in it that tries to determine "worth" of more expensive procedures based on the person's INCOME, rather than WHAT they actually do!
Congressman is LESS important than teachers!
EPGAH 2 years ago 4
Plus, Obama's memory loss is getting worse. He "forgot" that most of the uninsured are ILLEGALS who come here to "get one over" on us. Clinton signed into law that hospitals HAVE to treat anyone, regardless of legal status, or their capability/intention of paying. So illegals enter the ER, get patched up, and leave without paying!
The cost of this "free" care is passed on to people who actually EXIST, and can be tracked down and FORCED to pay!
EPGAH 2 years ago
also, do not forget, he has many different numbers on how many uninsured there are. He jumped from 46 m, to 45 m, to 35 m, to 30 m, back to 46 m
Christoppher1994 2 years ago
And Healthcare is a different situation. As Glenn Beck noted (yes that Con whack job) when he was in the hospital, his doctor gave him the most expensive treatment available precisely because Beck's insurance would cover it. The question is: Is that for the sake of the bottom line, or natural human inclination because "someone else" is paying for it. I believe it's the former. As for barriers, the economies of scale are a natural barrier, for example, preventing under-cutting on drug prices.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
"his doctor gave him the most expensive treatment available precisely because Beck's insurance would cover it."
What the fuck does that have to do with anything, other than proving my point that government regulation enables companies to engage in undesirable business practices?
You keep mentioning "natural barriers" that supposedly exist in markets rife with regulation. The point is whizzing over your head. Why is this so difficult for you to grasp?
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
The doctor giving him the most expensive treatment available because his insurance would cover it (if you have Cadillac insurance you get Cadillac care) proves GOVERNMENT intervention?? The gov't told him doctor to do it? The gov't told his insurance company to cover it?? The doctor had a choice as to what to prescribe (in this instance) but did not make a consumer choice. He made another kind...You are the one that refuses to discuss any points that interfere with your one-sided viewpoint.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
What are you not understanding here? Because of government regulation, the doctor is able to prescribe the most expensive surgery. How is that not obvious? I'm sick of repeating myself over and over again. That's why I have a fucking attitude, dipshit.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
Your attitude is because someone is challenging you. If ya really wanted the best for America you would do away w/ attitude & explain exactly where and how there's a gov't regulation that facilitates expensive treatment, or encourages doctors to go for the expensive tests, or for that matter hospitals to not bundle their charges... Just stating your conclusion and then calling me a name. All your posts are like that. When I asked you to explain your view: "pulling random numbers out of your ass"
Zakdayak 2 years ago
No, it's not. I just told you, my attitude is because I'm sick of having to repeat myself. And here I go again.
If you had made any intelligible argument, then I wouldn't have even responded to you. I would've sat there and contemplated it.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
There is no answer contained in your post. You have not even attempted to answer the question. At this point, you will probably obfuscate further. Explain, don't insult, explain, how does a Doctor choosing the most expensive treatment = evidence of a gov't regulation?
Zakdayak 2 years ago
I'm done. I'm sick of arguing with you.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
My last post was a question. A question you will not provide the answer to. Who's arguing? I see, you're confronted and you run away...
Zakdayak 2 years ago
And stop the fucking attitude like "WTF does this have to do with anything?" I'm an American too, and this is my fucking country. I get off my but and go door to door and campaign to get what I want done. You do not have a monopoly on being an American and its time people like you grew some balls and learned to respect Americans, because you claim that you love this country but NOT THE PEOPLE IN IT UNLESS THEY AGREE WITH YOU. What kind of an asshole is that? Comfirmation only? Go Listen to Rush.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
Reason is against Universal Health Care? Big fucking surprise.
JasonQLD 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
OBAMA is our legitemate president ,,,,ALL YOU PEOPLE CALLING HIM BARRY,,CALLING HIM SOCIALIST, ALL YOU BIRTHERS ARE RACISTS ,,WE KNOW WHATS REALLY BEHIND THIS UGLINESS,!!!\,RACISM !!! JOKER IS VERY RACIST!!! AND YOU KNOW IT !!BUT YOU ARE ALL TO STUPID TO REALIZE IT ,ARE YOU UNDER THE IMPRESSION RACISM IS OK?( IT ISINT, WE ARE GOING TO START CALLING YOU OUT and your neighbors will all know your ugly secret .AND OUR VOICES WILL BE HEARD,RACISM ISINT PART OF MY AMERICA,,YOU PEOPLE MAKE ME SICK
STEEEVVYZ 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
we also elected obama BECAUSE WE WANTED HEALTHCARE FOR ALL!!!HE IS DOING EXACTLY WHAT WE ELECTED HIM TO DO,,, THINK ABOUT IT HE RAN ON THIS HEALTHCARE FOR ALL PLATFORM,,AMERICA VOTED HIM IN THE LARGEST MANDATE IN 30 YEARS,,AMERICA WANTS THIS ,,,WE VOTED FOR IT,,THOSE THAT OPPOSE IT REPRESENT A FRINGE MINORITY VIEW,,,,
STEEEVVYZ 2 years ago
ok here in florida we had the same problem with home insurance,, high rates and companys refusing to cover anyone, state of florida created citizens ,,a govt run option !!!private home insurance...scince that time rates have fallen and more people are covered than ever,, very succesful!!
the compEtition forced the other companys to lower rates and accept more people,,they did not go out of business..i use the citizens my neighbor dosent,,,,EVERYTHING IS STILL OK
STEEEVVYZ 2 years ago
How about American citizen push back not republican. I am a union member against this legislation. So they want to get the insurance company out from between my Dr and my care. Well I can CHANGE my insurance company if I do not like the services they provide. How Do I ever get the ObamaCare out of MY health care? You Can't! Once they have their fingers in your life they never get out. How about those Gov run VA hospitals? I know vets that say its the worst health care there is.
foxbat40md 2 years ago
Politicians should try MORE Chem-Trails with toxins that cause disease. F-em all!!! F-em!!!!
MoronFreeZone 2 years ago
Bravo. That was an awesome video.
snslion 2 years ago
I want $4500.00 cash for our clunker government!
{oo}
Sighter7 2 years ago
Bushama has horrible socialist policies.
Scoforever 2 years ago 2
How did we get to the point where $1 trillion in 10 years is considered a "cheap estimate"? I guess people just hear it so much they don't even care anymore, kind of like war.
bracomadar 2 years ago
I always like to see Bush's big spending noted instead of pretending he was some kind of Laissez-Faire capitalist.
CountArtha 2 years ago 3
You guys really know how to make sphicters clench.
goneutt 2 years ago
represents less costs per person than private insurance companies especially since they generally make it a policy to deny people health care treatment if they have pre existing conditions.
also does anyone thing the claims and points made in I.O.U.S.A. are factual and true?
I happen to think so, but I may be wrong.
That documentary film seems to make a strong assertion in the possible direction of a public plan to counter to horrendous burden of health care costs.
FreedomLiberty21 2 years ago
if people are worried about price, then I want to ask which will cost more: having the federal government provide a public option for health care treatment
or
private insurance companies charging people for health care treatment?
(keep in mind the public option proposed by Congress would NOT eliminate or put out of business those wonderful insurance companies that pay (sometimes) for Americans health care costs)
I'm more inclined that the government, regardless of how much it would cost
FreedomLiberty21 2 years ago
Not to worry . . . . the private insurers won't last long if we get nationalized health care. Why should employers keep providing health care benefits when they can unload their employees onto the national plan? BTW, it will be a national health *rationing* plan. This is another power grab by Liberals to get more money flowing through Washington so they can control more of the economy. I don't think it has a lot to do with "health."
oilhammer04 2 years ago
it boggles my mind that these guys can make money out of thin air.
Frances3654 2 years ago
He speaks that number with uncanny ease.
bertly71 2 years ago
If we don't slow the spending we are looking at a longggg recession ,no jobs , etc etc. Wait hey maybe Americans and that free market thing can come back some day?
lenny380 2 years ago
Does anybody here believe that inflation was 78% in the first 6 years of the decade? ANYBODY??
Zakdayak 2 years ago
I'd love to continue this exercise in futility but it's time for me to sleep now.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
This universal health care crap is nothing but an excuse to tax the hell out of us. So let it be shoved up his ass sideways.
NOMCCBAMA 2 years ago 2
wyden supports O's bill right?
i love the audacity of these dopes
nickd4818 2 years ago
Great video!
freesk8 2 years ago
People, we are being set up for a huge fall.
truthsabre7 2 years ago
I think Glenn Beck is doing the job Rush Limbaugh just won't do? And that is to tell the truth that Republicans may need to be opposed for not standing up for the constitution.
SchnickTech 2 years ago 3
glenn beck is a stooge too. I remember him supporting the Iraq war and calling ron paul crazy.
ferrozm 2 years ago
So its not possible to agree with Ron Paul on 99% of the issues and disagree on 1%?
zzx2847 2 years ago 2
its ok to disagree but to say that he's crazy and that the people who support him are domestic terrorists is terrible.
ferrozm 2 years ago
We need people like Rush Limbaugh to influence donors to leave the Republican party for the Libertarian party. I am not one of these people who think that their is not a dimes worth of difference in the 2 parties but on government spending take the party identities away and try to tell me the difference. You know the Federalists and Whigs were once parties in the United States. We need the RNC and DNC afraid of ending up like them.
SchnickTech 2 years ago 3
AS a health care professional, and as someone who has read that ginormous bill, it is by far the worst thing I have ever read in my entire life. It IS the take over of the private sector. Instead of tax deductions to provide care from your business, they will be taxed unless they provide you with the govt plan. Anyone with "inadequate" coverage will be taxed (ie. high deductible HSA plans). Cancer patients, special needs patients, and elderly will be rationed care.
This reform is terrible.
printo69 2 years ago 5
It will cover the sticker shock treatment; but you will have to be placed on a waiting list and it will be a number of months before receiving treatment. In addition if you are over the age of 65 you will just be given pain killers as it wouldnt be economical for you to receive the full treatment.
SUSPENDEDKUFFAR 2 years ago 2
You guys should work on getting a partner account, so the videos get more views. More people need to see this stuff.
MooseOfReason 2 years ago 5
I wonder daily, are our politicians really this stupid or are they deliberately trying to destroy our country, or do special interest groups buy them off so they just don't give a FUCK about the U.S. citizens?
RamFan4u 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why is ReasonTV so biased against Obama? It's not OBamacare it's called PUBLIC OPTION and its what people want.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
yeah its what stupid people want
we cannot afford it, and it will create socialized medicine. no company will provide their employees with health care if the government will do it for free... the premium won't cover the costs of the care... it's a fucking disaster waiting to happen
rrush2214 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Actually, we can't afford not to confront the industry where costs go up 10% every year. It's now at 18% of GDP where most developed countries are at 6 to 8. Also other countries have hybrid systems (not like Canada) offering a choice and rich people can buy out (so that takes care of the innovation argument). The money going into the pubic agency will be less thanwhat we're paying in premiums. Again, you can't negotiate when it comes to life and limb - healthcare is not a commodity.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
your right so lets make it a government program... because the tax revenue is at it's lowest since the great depression... that will cut costs and we'll all be healthy and happy...
we'll see what happens
rrush2214 2 years ago 2
"Actually, we can't afford not to confront the industry where costs go up 10% every year."
While you're stating that, Ben Bernanke is talking up the merits of inflation and doing his Fed duty to prevent deflation at any cost.
In case you didn't understand- and given that you're claiming people actually want this health care plan, I'm assuming you didn't- that means that the cost of everything will continue to increase as long as the Fed exists.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago 3
Furthermore, I'm absolutely dumbfounded that you think introducing government into the equation will somehow make things cheaper. It doesn't work that way. When you decide to take money from point A to point B by way of points C through Z, you're guaranteed to lose a whole lot along the way. That's all the government really does: it takes your money and decides where to spend it (instead of letting you do it yourself), and skims off the tops as it doles it out.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago 3
Health care is an economic issue. If we didn't have government interfering, the market would have solved this problem decades ago. Government only solves problems when it gets lucky; most of the time, it just creates more problems. But hey, even a broken clock shows the right time twice a day, right?
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago 3
Aha, you know who else is dumbfounded? The Germans (public option with private healthcare), the French, The Australians (small waiting times), the Canadians (don't favor this particular system but theirs IS cheaper) the Swiss, the Japanese, the Tiawanese, the Swedish, the Costa Ricans (!). They're dumbfounded that somehow they're healthcare is cheaper....very dumbfounding....
Zakdayak 2 years ago
Their health care is not cheaper. Do you have any fucking clue how much they pay in taxes? Why don't you ask someone from one of those countries how much they love their health care? All the Europeans I've talked to described very poor experiences.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago 2
A)Only part of their taxes go to healthcare B) As expressed by percentage of GDP means the money that the country spends anyway. Those who went Medically bankrupt yet still possessed insurance (gaps in coverage) spent on average $9,000 less than those who didn't have coverage. They still payed out of pocket. C)You're trading a private price tag for a public one, but the cost is still there. Don't forget, the externalities are always passed on to the taxpayer.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
What the fuck are you babbling about? You claimed that government health care would be cheaper. You even made some cryptic remark about how not having any choice but to pay isn't a market. Now you're telling me "externalities" are passed on to the taxpayer. You're not making any sense here.
Do you know what GDP is? I'll give you a hint: it's not how much money the country spends.
How exactly is the US supposed to borrow money when it's already $12 trillion in debt?
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
Go look up what an externality is.
The money wouldn't be borrowed 1)You'd be spending what you're spending on premiums except a lot less.2) The rich would pay a little more. I know, that's the crux, isn't it? Making the rich pay more is just awful...
"Not having any choice" You don't have a choice, inelastic demand. If a doctor wants to charge you $85,000 it's called healthcare. If a mobster does it, it's called A PROTECTION RACKET.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
Taxes are enforced via extortion. Also, it's not actually a racket unless the doctor breaks/threatens to break your kneecaps then demands $85,000 to fix them.
111thedude111 2 years ago
Wow, you're both full of shit. Inflation does have an effect on everything, it's just a matter of degree and is not the sole determinant.
Also, a big part of the explanation for that $85,000 healthcare is because of market distortions by the government itself, such as huge tax breaks and other regulations that really only end up benefiting the rich (who would buy healthcare anyway) the most. In other words, the externality would not be as large.
Shadyhunter04 2 years ago
"Inflation does have an effect on everything, it's just a matter of degree and is not the sole determinant."
I never said it was. Zakdayak repeatedly insisted that inflation had nothing to do with rising health care costs, and I simply stated that it did because inflation affects the cost of everything.
You're absolutely correct, current health care regulations are a huge reason why it's so expensive.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
And even though an externality would still exist, it does not mean that the government has to repair it as non profits and charities could still cover the cost. One big flaw I've found in public finance is that there is always the assumption that the government won't piss the money away.
So there you go,, if you want to talk in economics terms, that 85 k is caused by a rightward shift of healthcare demand comprised of the rich thanks to good old gov't and lack of supply shift by the same thing.
Shadyhunter04 2 years ago
Shady, if you're saying that the gov't doesn't always have to fix an externality, that's probably correct. As for "pissed away" the point is not to have that and get them to spend on what matters. After all, no one would suggest we scrap the Police because of corruption scandals, or the military because of $10k toilet seats. As for market distortion, what are you talking about - our healthcare system = private gain. You cannot get healthcare unless you go to war (VA) or buy into the system.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
And that's my point, the poor were crowded out because the inelastic demand curve shifted to the right caused by terrible government incentives that favor the rich (or those that work for a company with benefits( this screws the labor market too)) and a very inelastic supply curve caused by the same thing.
Healthcare used to be much, much cheaper than it is today and buying into the system was not too hard, our current condition isn't due to coincidence,.
Shadyhunter04 2 years ago
If the police were acting as a mafia, it it would certainly be better to have the free rider problem and a mafia that we didn't fund through public money. If the military paid the same way for every single thing (not just toilet seats) they bought to a certain point, then the same amount of protection would probably be achievable with the private solution. Never say never, because I bet even you would suggest the same under those circumstances it it got bad enough.
Shadyhunter04 2 years ago
Oh, I forgot to mention, there is no such thing as a free rider problem with health care, so it's a terrible example to use in trying to counter my argument either way.
Shadyhunter04 2 years ago
"After all, no one would suggest we scrap the Police because of corruption scandals, or the military because of $10k toilet seats."
Actually, they would, if they were smart, because they would realize that private corporations could provide the same service at a reduced cost. There's no reason that those services need be provided by government.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
I know what "externality" means. I don't know what specifics you're referring to though, as you consistently use vague language and make blanket statements without backing anything up, like this one:
"You'd be spending what you're spending on premiums except a lot less."
The rich would pay more? Great, since you're not fucking rich, right? Why the hell should the rich be able to keep what they earn? They're rich, they can afford it.
What a crock of shit.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
"If a doctor wants to charge you $85,000 it's called healthcare. If a mobster does it, it's called A PROTECTION RACKET."
If a doctor wants to charge exorbitant fees, then he will find himself without customers (in a free market, not in your health care fantasy).
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
787: The 10% rise in Healthcare has NOTHING to do with any normal cyclical market mechanism. Inflation has been low for several years (except in non fuctioning markets like oil) In anycase the 10% has nothing to do with the Fed. And the Fed is a private consortium. So WTF? The cost of healthcare is far lower where insurance companies, Hospitals, and Pharma have incentives to decrease costs. Here the opposite is true, that's why it goes up. It's not a market when you have no choice but to pay.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
"The 10% rise in Healthcare has NOTHING to do with any normal cyclical market mechanism"
Oh, you got that right. Inflation is not a "normal market mechanism" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean), but it's got everything to do with the price of anything going up... obviously.
"Inflation has been low for several years"
Now you are just pulling things out of your ass.
"And the Fed is a private consortium."
So that makes it okay? I don't see the point here.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago 3
"The cost of healthcare is far lower where insurance companies, Hospitals, and Pharma have incentives to decrease costs."
Duh. You know what the best incentive is? Competition in a free market. Government involvement eliminates that. That is why costs keep going up. This will only make that worse (the government doesn't have to compete with anyone).
"It's not a market when you have no choice but to pay."
Genius, health care is not free, whether the government provides it or not.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
And ironically enough, having the government provide anything FORCES taxpayers to pay for it whether they want it or not. You're right, that's no market, that's fucking extortion.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago 7
watch?v=FPlhUuGRTQQ
Chrisnoscrub047 2 years ago
"The URL contained a malformed video ID."
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
sad face. search youtube for " a basic argument against the state" its the first one that comes up
Chrisnoscrub047 2 years ago
Yeah, I've seen that one. I love confederalsocialist's videos.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
NO. Inflation does not explain why everything goes up in price. For example Healthcare has nonelastic demand. And anything going up 10% would have nothing to do with inflation (I'm well aware of the Fed's game of debt-based $) since the rate of inflation is much lower and despite interest rates being at 0 there is no lending going on so that's not it either - we're in a deflationary cycle, yet healthcare still goes up. You haven't a clue what you're talking about, like the Fed being private.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
"Inflation does not explain why everything goes up in price."
Actually, it does. Prices continue to increase as inflation does. That is why everything was much cheaper 5 decades ago than it is today.
We're in a deflationary cycle? Good lord, either you don't know what deflation is, or you live with your head firmly implanted in your asshole. You don't spend $12 trillion that you don't have without causing inflation.
What exactly did I say about the Fed that was incorrect?
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
I should also add that there are a number of models present. So for example, America will never be Sweden. We will never have taxes that high...but it's not necessary...you borrow what works. Ask the Germans or the Swiss who have private insurance companies.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
No, it does not. Gas prices go up and down independent of inflation. And inflation is not 10% every year. What the fuck man? Why are you arguing the flat/young-earth creationist kind of crap on this. Inflation is not 10%! Don't be fucking ridiculous. In fact, in 2006 alone healthcare premiums went up more than TWICE the rate of inflation. That year premiums went up 7.7% which was a 78% increase in 6 fucking years! Also, overhead can go up without inflation -ad costs for insurance companies.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
"Gas prices go up and down independent of inflation."
Then why hasn't it gone back down to a dollar a gallon? INFLATION. Gas prices fluctuate, duh, as does the price of anything. Average it out and over the decades, you can clearly see the price increasing. This isn't rocket science, it's basic math.
"Inflation is not 10%!"
I NEVER SAID IT WAS. You need to learn how to fucking read.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
First , you're the one that's not reading. In 2006, premiums went up double the amount of inflation,sometimes the cost of healthcare goes up 10%. You blame this on inflation. So, ahem, YOU DID SAY THAT. I fail to see why gas has to go back to a dollar a gallon in order for you to acknowlege that it has increased out of step with inflation, when inflation is only 1 to 3% in recent years. In 2006 the inflation rate was 3.24%, insurance premiums went up 7.2%. Pharma markups are in the thous of %
Zakdayak 2 years ago
No, I didn't blame it on inflation. Go back and quote the exact sentence where I said "healthcare goes up 10% solely due to inflation." Clearly, you're not comprehending the point I was making in bringing up inflation in the first place. Stop putting words in my mouth.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
"it has increased out of step with inflation"
Gasoline prices don't directly track inflation, but neither does anything else, as supply and demand play a huge role, as does legislation. But the entire point is that you're complaining about increasing prices while the entity that controls our money is constantly inflating it. Prices will always continue to go up because of that. Even if health care is "fixed," and becomes cheaper, prices will continue to increase thanks to the Fed.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
Why would it track inflation? Oil prices are a major CAUSE of inflation. You have it all fucking backwards. Unbelievable. What you're trying to say is that inflation + gov't regulation = Privatized system price hikes. The problem: It goes up every year regardless of regulation OR inflation. And when only ONE man's stock bonus can equal to $1 out of every $700 spent (3/4 of a BILLION dollars) and 30% out of every Healhcare dollar goes to corporate overhead like buying ads...Jesus, WAKE UP.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
It could go either way actually, inflation could piss off OPEC and have them demand more dollars for the same quantity. In that case it would be inflation causing even more inflation, but for most cases you're right.
You're really wrongly dismissive of the degree that government regulation has in screwing with healthcare prices for those not included in the government plans. You also seem to like talking about the evils of corporatism, but what about the evils of bureaucracy?
Shadyhunter04 2 years ago
There ARE evils of bureacracy, except 1) Gov't should be made accountable to people, and as long as we're in a democracy, that will be the case 2) Private bureacracy is only accountable to the investor class (and then only perhaps when owning preferred stock or a substantial stake). If you have a problem with Aetna, you can't go anywhere else other than government (well you could go to Michael Moore, but let's not go there). Their bureacracy is a threat at times to people's lives.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
And there is where the problem lies. Gov't isn't accountable to the people. It's just good at manipulating the stupid masses when it is given the power to do so. Once it gains power, it has even greater leverage against those dependent of its programs to buy votes (this goes for both corps and individuals).
It's why we live in a constitutional republic and not a pure democracy. Democracy is overrated and can be as bad or worse than a dictatorship.
Shadyhunter04 2 years ago 3
You're missing the explanatory factor (without getting into a philosophical discussion, although I'm puzzled that you imply a Con. Republic is better, isn't that what we have?) - what I mean by explanation is what motivates the government to trick the "stupid masses."
Zakdayak 2 years ago
"and as long as we're in a democracy, that will be the case"
Right, because Bush was held accountable for starting a war that many of us didn't support.
Pipe dream. Democracy is simply another permutation of control.
"Private bureaucracy" (I'm assuming you mean private business) is accountable to the consumer. The drive for profit can only be fulfilled by giving the consumer the product that they want at the best price. Government, on the other hand, is accountable to no one.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
"Accountable to the consumer." Boy you are really naive. That only happens when you're talking about a functional market with elastic demand. Here, many states have two or maybe even only one insurance provider. Most "consumers" don't shop for insurance and they certainly don't have negotiating power. My friend's mom was hospitalized for example and the Hospital asked for an outrageous amount. He managed to get it knocked off by a few g's. I mean, even then it was still like $7,000 for 4 days.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
I can't even begin to make heads or tails of what you're talking about the way you throw around your words. Let me see if I can break it down in simpler terms:
In the US, we use these things called Federal Reserve notes (aka US dollars) to exchange goods and services. The value of these notes changes, and over the long term, it constantly decreases. This results in more notes to be used for the same product. Prices of all things go up. Do you get it now?
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago 2
As far as regulation and prices go, prices become artificially higher the more government interferes in people's transactions. Those high health care costs you're complaining about are the result of both inflation and regulation. You pretty much had it. Inflation plus regulation equals greater cost of goods and services.
I guess you're not familiar with the term "barriers to entry"?
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago 2
Thank you for the discussion on your concept of inflation. I dodn't really agree with this explantion, but that's not really relevant to our discussion. My point is that you cannot blame the Fed, or any other cause of inflation, for price hikes in Healthcare. Healthcare is expensive because people have little choice but to buy at inflated prices (what would you pay for a finger or a kidney?) and because of Corporate profits.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
So you're saying I cant blame the federal reserve for inflation yet they're the ones printing the money and mass printing it so my money loses value? Are you that stupid? Thank you for proving that obama zombie federal reserve apologists dont know what they're talking about. Get back to worshiping obamas inflated ego like the shill you are.
zetsway5000 2 years ago 5
No,I'm not saying you can't blame inflation on the Fed (in part anyway). I'm saying you can't blame risein healthcare costs on inflation. The whole discussion on inflation is nearly irrelevant. If you were to print a lot of money inflation would occur under normal conditions, but why are we discussing this now? Is it because you'd rather talk about your Grandmother's underwear than talk about a rather obvious thorn in the right-wing side: The cost of Healthcare in the US is out-fucking-rageous.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
Of course you can, you need to take a class in basic economics. When your money loses value things cost more. Your money loses value due to inflation so in turn things cost more when the money supply is inflated. Inflation is completely relevant, again take a class in basic economics. The price of healthcare is so high in our country because our government inflates prices due to its involvement with the market. socializing healthcare in the US will only raise the cost even more.
zetsway5000 2 years ago 2
"Thank you for proving that obama zombie federal reserve apologists ..." If it makes you feel better to insult people, by misrepresenting their opinion, I guess that's cool. The Fed policies are pro-inflation, but that usually happens through bank loans, credit cards, etc...in other words money is debt under that system. Deficit spending, since financed by borrowing and the paying of interest to those that own T-Bills, is income-redistrbution. I don't recall any of you mothers opposing that.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
I'm not going to argue with an idiot that doesn't even know the basic principles of economics. Like inflating the money supply raises prices. Have a nice day.
zetsway5000 2 years ago
You're right....about inflation...But the rise in Healthcare costs and premiums is not from inflation. So my expertise in that field is not relevant. I have already documented the large gulf between the rate inflation and healthcare cost increase.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
Like I said its not just inflation that's driving up healthcare costs, that's only one of the factors. You need to factor in that government is also inflating the costs by interfering with markets dynamics, but to say that inflation isn't a large factor in the increase in costs is foolish.
zetsway5000 2 years ago
OK, So let's keep it simple. Two guys check into the same hospital, with the same illness. Each stays 6 days. They stay in adjacent rooms and get the same treatments and tests. One is charged $7,000 and the other is charged $10,000 dollars. The only difference is in the first case the tests were "bundled." Is that the result of a gov't regulation? What does the "sovereign consumer" do?
Zakdayak 2 years ago
Yes its a result of government regulation because they artificially make the prices higher through interfering with the market. One might pay more because he has a different insurance plan. One might not have insurance, because he doesn't want insurance, and just pays up all his medical bills upfront.
zetsway5000 2 years ago 2
"One is charged $7,000 and the other is charged $10,000 dollars."
I fail to see any relevancy in you pulling random numbers out of your ass. You keep complaining about the high cost of health care, but what you can't seem to get through your head is that the reason health care is so high is because of government interference subsidizing certain practices and creating barriers to entry through regulation. If the health care industry were a free market, you wouldn't have those things.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
The relevancy is this is exactly what HOSPITALS do. Your assertion about gov't regulation came after that of inflation. In other words, you didn't raise it until I pointed out factually that inflation was an inadequate explantion So now I'm trying to understand the role of "gov't regulation" by using a real-life example. Because 2 patients w/ same kind of room, same treatment, routinely get charged different amounts. I see that you produced some specficity "barriers to entry." WHY the barriers?
Zakdayak 2 years ago
Because lobbyists want to ensure their company's stability in the marketplace by eliminating competition to increase profits. Do a search here on youtube for "barriers to entry."
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
Yes, there are barriers to entry into radio markets because private enterprise wants it that way. In healthcare though, an up and coming insurnce company would have to negotiate deals with hospitals, pharman, etc...there are already obstacles which certainly are not mandated by government. So, a new entry couldn't slash prices to attract new customers and would have to amass millions to pay off current claims.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
How are those deals any different than deals that would have to be negotiated in radio? There's no difference. Both are providing a service. Both services are getting interference from government.
Costs of operations are not barriers to entry. Barriers to entry are artificial requirements created by government to disallow the entry of new competition. Higher cost operations simply mean that greater investment capital is required, that's all.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
The deals I was referring to are private market barriers, not gov't mandated. You do not have a monopoly over words. Excessive costs or large capital investement are both known as barriers to every day entry. In LA for example, you can't break into the radio market without $300 million. That's a barrier. Gov't regulations on the radio industry have been taken down or ignored. And yet, it's gotten worse. Switching back to healthcare, in countries with a ton of regulation, costs are down.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The deals I was referring to are private market barriers, not gov't mandated. You do not have a monopoly over words. Excessive costs or large capital investement are both known as barriers to every day entry. In LA for example, you can't break into the radio market without $300 million. That's a barrier. Gov't regulations on the radio industry have been taken down or ignored. And yet, it's gotten worse. Switching back to healthcare, in countries with a ton of regulation, costs are down.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
"The deals I was referring to are private market barriers, not gov't mandated. You do not have a monopoly over words. Excessive costs or large capital investement are both known as barriers to every day entry. In LA for example, you can't break into the radio market without $300 million. That's a barrier. Gov't regulations on the radio industry have been taken down or ignored. And yet, it's gotten worse. Switching back to healthcare, in countries with a ton of regulation, costs are down."
Zakdayak 2 years ago
You're ass-backwards. When someone refers to "barriers to entry," they're talking about government regulations. Those excessive costs are created by regulations within the radio industry. Did you watch the video that I told you to watch?
You're either lying or uninformed if you think radio is free of regulations. To be honest, I surprised you'd have the balls to suggest something so blatantly false. There's even arguments over a new pending regulation requiring royalties.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
Watched that vid before, and although well thought out, it misses a few things. If gov't tried to level the playing field, the Heritage Foundation, FEE, and the rest of the Ayn Rand freaks would scream bloody murder. Something like that happens inevitably with "laissez faire" capitalism. Because that's what it means IN PRACTICE. There are always regulations, the only difference is who benefits from them. I'd rather not protect the big money interests.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
There's no such thing as government leveling the playing field. A level playing field is a free market.
A free market is self-regulating. Sure, there are always regulations because we don't have a free market, but we should.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
"The Fed policies are pro-inflation, but that usually happens through bank loans, credit cards, etc...in other words money is debt under that system. Deficit spending, since financed by borrowing and the paying of interest to those that own T-Bills, is income-redistrbution. I don't recall any of you mothers opposing that."
I'm trying to figure out a single reason why anyone in their right mind would actually want to support any of that. Yeah, money as debt sounds like a great idea.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
In response to me talking about Healthcare increases you said: "While you're stating that, Ben Bernanke is talking up the merits of inflation and doing his Fed duty to prevent deflation at any cost...that means that the cost of everything will continue to increase as long as the Fed exists. "
This was your method of dismissing the private sector's increasing of costs. But since there's obviously a problem (in 2002, $ spent per privately insured person went up 9.6% for example) you backpedal
Zakdayak 2 years ago
"This was your method of dismissing the private sector's increasing of costs."
No. That's just you not fucking comprehending the post I made.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
Don't backpedal and man-up. You know that costs are too high, but since you can't blame private interests, even though that's the system, you blamed it on inflation. "Bureacracy" didn't rear it's ugly head until I repeatedly pointed out that costs were out of step with that. That doesn't even mentioned the Thousands of dollars Hospitals routiney charge for stays. I did mention the Pharma mark-ups in the Thousands of % didn't I? It's a pure lunatic thing to blame this on inflation, my friend.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
And finally, you tried to poke fun at my assertion of democracy, but you did not explain what motivates the lying. Who benefited from the Iraq war for example? Of course, I opposed it, protested it, called by senators to express my opposition, but such things are possible in any system of governement. However, thank you for confirming my suspicions as to what Right-wingers actually think about Democracy.
Zakdayak 2 years ago
I'm not a "right-winger," I don't participate in your false dichotomy of an authority system. Try north and south on the political compass. Oh wait, you probably don't know what that is.
What motivates the lying? Greed. Are you saying that if government didn't exist, you'd lie and steal from other people? I don't think you'd last in society very long, if that's the case.
The only thing that keeps you in line is government? You sound like a religious person clutching to your Bible.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago
The fall of an empire. History in the making.
82abhilash 2 years ago 5
we dont fucking have that money
wake up
ic300x 2 years ago 8
This comment has received too many negative votes show
No, piss off.
Wcoltd 2 years ago
I think we'd be strapped to find anything that cost less than projected. Politicians are farthuffers.
HymerSchmidt 2 years ago 3
Holy shit, 2:04 would probably clear out all of Washington!!! It might even be worth making into law just for that fact alone! Sadly, that's probably why such a thing would NEVER get through the House or Senate...
shDwfthSUN 2 years ago 4
Obama has no fucking idea what he's doing when it comes to his economy. Neither does anyone in his administration. They're all fucking idiots winging it as they go, because they haven't bothered to learn from history that you can't just keep printing money and racking up debt.
Hyperinflation, here we come!
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago 8
Oops, "his economy" should be "the economy." Neeed bettr proffreading.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago 2
nah... I'm pretty sure it's "his economy" at this point.
ApolloD7 2 years ago 6