Sarah Palin did state this, and she was mocked and made fun of by the liberal loons. Sounds like you forget very easily. And, where are the liberals on this? The Whitehouse has more interest in helping foreign nations and nationals then helping Americans.
Health insurance companies wrote the fucking bill dipshits..nothing good in that bill for us, they spent 98% of their lobbying budget fighting to get this corporate piece of shit legislation passed. Congrats sheep..freedom is dead.
Wow...These Turks can put a spin on shit, huh. He claims the public option would not allow for rationing. He must not be aware of the rationing that goes on with the public option known as Medicare. And when I was active duty, I had to seek private health care for my ankle injury because the government would not fund its treatment. Yeah, keep chanting the graces of public option. Fools.
campaign for liberty's never stopped protesting against healthcare and we also organized the first tea party during ron paul's election.. of course cenk pays so little to real grassroots movements that he wouldn't know. if he left actually has any real grassroots movement going they would know a lot more about what's going on instead of generalizing every protester into one bundle.
Having too much freedom is daunting and actually keeps other freedoms to be easily obtained. That's the paradox of too many choices. I want a different type of choice to be offered, the choice to have either one easy option where the government does it all for you, or where you do everything for yourself.
We argue between "simple but controlled by another party" and "full control, but not very accessible". What about the option to choose between both?
I hope you realize now why some of us just want the Government out of our business. They are INCAPABLE to get it right. I am still very much against the Health Care bill... And I am sure many of the tea bag parties are still holding parties you just aren't looking for them. And yet you are STILL the idiot who trust Government to do the right thing. Hopelessly an idiot.
Your argument proves that you are a lacky of the insurance companies. They do NOTHING for their money except take a cut of the premium as the middle man. They perform NO services and their board of directors decide who gets care and who doesn't.
It's time to put them out of business before more people die....
If you don't like being regulated, then, take your own advice and go somewhere else....oh, wait....they ALL have govt insurance...jeez. Rethink your career. Plumber maybe?
@172677 Replacing a middle-man with someone who has no power over you for another middle-man that can put you in jail or draft you into war is beyond stupid. The insurance comapnies only get away with what the Government allows them to get away with.
Wrong logic. Insurance companies have no power of YOU, the doctor...they do, however, have the power over US, the patient....THEY decide our medical care..not the doctors.
And, in case you haven't heard, there is no draft.
You're right about the insurance companies have been allowed to run rampant over us....but that's coming to a fast and screeching halt.
They, like you, may have to find some other way to make a living.
As a person who has yet to treat ONE patient for anything, I'll just say this.
Unlike you, MOST doctors are practicing because they love what they do...and are good at it....and don't give a rat where their fees come from. They care about the people who walk into their office.
You don't seem to be doctor material...maybe go work on wall street where greed is good.
Although I haven't treated many patients I have treated some. Of course under a licensed doctor's supervision. That was all for free and voluntary on the part of the doc and I. I am volunteering my time twice in the next two months helping homeless families receive health care and volunteering my time to help with care at a cancer fundraiser. So if you think I am only after the ":bottom line" you are wrong. And I don't think explaining my situation anymore to you will help. You are kinda dense.
It's not that Americans can't afford health insurance, it's that they can't afford all the shit they bought instead of health insurance. Typical dems giving everything away for a vote to gain power. Clueless....
Geesh, did the insurance companies get a blowjob with that too? Wow, if it serves the insurance companies, screws the middle and working class, and leads to higher profits, then it must be ok. Business as usual, fuck 'em all.
Of course the Republicans aren't against this. The Democrats and Republicans are not conservatives and liberals. There is no ideology. Washington is a trough where our "representatives" feed on our money and consolidate power. By making this a dem v rep argument, THEY WIN. That was the problem with the healthcare bill to begin with, not death panels and taxes. WE surrender more freedom.
The hilarious thing about the campaign against the public option was that they were able to cry "government rationing!" and "government doesn't have a bottom line!" without realizing the irony in that.
Eh? We are calling them names because they are not being consistant.
They should be out protesting!!! If they're grass roots they should be protesting the government mandating limits! GO TEA BAGGERS! Oh wait there not doing it now.
Because rush limbo is not hyping it, industry is not sponsoring it....
More evidence to show they don't understand the issues and they're mindless idiots. 1/4 of them were holding misspelt signs calling Obama a MUSLIM TSARIST COMMUNIST.
Whenever Govnerment is involved with any program, it becomes more responsive to inflation, thats a simple fact. The Government lays down red tape making it difficult for these companies and hospitals to obtain the cheapest medication, and don't associate cheap with the quality, because the quality is just fine with the cheaper stuff. Did you know many doctors refuse medicare patients simply because all the red tape involved?
What blows my mind is that they're going to pass the bill in this format so that after it's passed they can bring it up so that everyone will STILL be freaked out and still buy private healthcare because "they cover you no matter what!" This is fucking garbage America. I still feel bad for you.
While my OHIP here in Canada doesn't cover the 'minor' things (like non-essential drugs/xrays/therapies) - if I got Cancer, there is no upper limit. None. Not even if I got cancer in every freaking organ and had to get 56 transplants and 275 surgeries. Not even if after being cured of that I develop something worse. OHIP covers you where it counts - not where the government has opted to say that it costs them too much for you to live.
yes, the main limits are transplant organs which are rationed and damn ZOMG they should be. A 70yr old does not get a new heart over a 20yr old and I don't give a FUCK how much money the old geezer has.
This healthcare shit is the reason alot of people couldnt keep a job even before unemployment started to skyrocket.. A company hires you on a probationary period usually 60 to 90 days and then to avoid giving you insurance they work you 59 to 89 days and fire your ass with no explanation. This shit has gone on for years and years.
First they stuff the ballot box with millions of fake names. Next they spend trillions to go no where. Then they railroad a "health care" bill through to take over a third of the economy and increase taxes for all working people.
If you've ever wondered what it was like to live in 1860, I can tell you, that is where we are right now. When families are being jailed or forced to foreclose when they can't afford the taxes on Obamacare, this country will tear itself apart. People are pissed.
This is all fancy-danicing. The ultimate goal of all this surrounding healthcare reform is single payer insurance.
Single payer is the ONLY one that will be true reform..... This bill from the Senate will be signed ..then it will go into meetings with the House, where the public option will be put back in....Obama will sign it...and in a few years, when it doesn't work, the single payer will be brought in..more along the lines of Medicare
@172677 I tell you right now that if there a single payer system in this country I will find some place else to be a doctor. So enjoy your equal healthcare. I hope you can find someone to provide it.
@Ryan And, I will tell you that if you are really a doctor, you care more for profit than for your patients.
Most doctors practice medicine to help heal the sick - no matter their economic status. There are a few, such as yourself, that are more interested in the bottom line.
You, sir, should open a Cadillac practice, cash only, and cater to the wealthy who will pay you out of their pocket. You are of no use at all to the working family or those who cannot afford insurance -- or your prices.
@172677 I am a second year medical student and I have accumulated over 100k dollars worth of debt already. I wasn't worried about my debt until the Government threaten to step in and regulate everything. Including how much I will be payed. I entered the profession to help people, but I didn't enter the profession to become a slave to the people either. I would like my 18 hour days of studying to pay off. I don't think that is too much to ask for.
Well, if you don't like the heat, stay out of the kitchen. As a "second year" medical student, you have no experience at all and plenty of time to change your major.
Most doctors enter the profession for reasons other than how much money they make.
As for your student loans....well, join the crowd. There are plenty others who are in the same boat. Medical students aren't exempt, for sure.
I have one-hundred-thousand-dollars-worth-of-debt... I am now a slave to the system... I CAN NOT FIND something else to do. I will OWE a house before I even make one cent. You don't seem to understand or care what it is that I will go thru. Or the fact that as soon as I get out of school I will have what is equivalent to a house payment before I even have a house.
That was the entire point of the health care opposition. We have been saying that it would lead to rationing as it does in all other nations with universal health care, and now we have been vindicated. I am quite frankly appalled at this sell out to the insurance companies. These people that craft these bills have no sense of morality or economics.
Have you even VISITED nations with universal healthcare? IT IS NOT RATIONED NEARLY as much as in the US where the insurance is rationed, to ensure the profit of the healthcare companies in some cases, and overprescribed to ensure the profit of healthcare companies in others.
For all the money the US is paying (twice as much all up) for healthcare, life expectancy is lower and infant mortality is much higher in the US than in the rest of the Western World.
Visiting them is not the point. I have, however, read studies about these other nations. The main problem with life expectancy in America, is we have much more unhealthy lifestyles and take more risks than other nations. If you exclude deaths that have nothing to do with the health care system, we would be number one in life expectancy.
I am done with the Democratic Party. I am voting independent from now on. This health insurance is a joke. No public option but we are still going to make it illegal to be uninsured and limit coverage! They had this planed from the get go! How can they DO THIS!!!! It is insane!
@indiesixtynine If they give us a law that mandates us to buy private insurance instead of public health care like promised, I am finished. We all should be. That would be the biggest betrayal possible!
All of the top healthcare systems in the world are all nationalized healthcare systems. There is not a single successful private healthcare model on a national scale. The US's private system is ranked 37th place in the world. All the cheapest systems are public nationalized systems.
You know you are arguing with idiots on this issue when in this rare case its beyond doubt.
At least with issues like finance there is no clear example of what is 100% right or wrong.
But on this issue there are 20+ top examples of countries with same/worse and greater wealth per capita around the world that do HC better.
Imagine if other debates were this easy. Imagine 36 countries had electric cars with better mileage and lower cost, would the right wingers still argue? Probably.....
@A86, I want you to go back to wherever you got this information...and LIST those 36 countries that have better health care than us. Because common sense says that when you have to offer health care to everyone there is inherently going to be rationing, so there is no way socialized health care is better. Capitalism means innovation, and thats why rich ppl from all these "great" health care systems come here for care.
(dot) photius (dot) com / rankings / healthranks (dot) html
If you don't know this you're way behind in this discussion.
And no, there is no major rationing in these countries. The private insurers ration because providing service is a cost. The goal in capitalism is to minimize costs and maximize profits. To provide as little service as possible to the fewest people while charging them the highest amount possible maximizes profit.
Actually-existing capitalism limits innovation that is detrimental to the profits of oligopolies. Look how alternative energy is blocked by Big Oil and Big Coal lobbies.
Anyway, even though the US was the biggest inventor/innovator in medicine doesn't mean the average citizen readily has access to it. You pointed that out by pointing out that it's mostly rich people who get the best healthcare in the US. Doesn't really mean much to the average citizen.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@A86, yeah, you're talking about the bastardization of capitalism, great, you realize what government regulation in the market does, good job. Which brings up a good point, more capitalism, less government involvement, better health care. Government health care is garbage, period. Oh yeah, about those 36 other countries you were talking about that have better health care than us...
That's talking about government helping certain private companies block other ones. That's government aiding certain companies, not "regulating" them.
There is not nor has there ever been a single private healthcare system that is successful at a level beyond local. All national-level private healthcare systems are expensive and inefficient. There are some things markets are not good at just like there are some things governments are not good at.
There is no such thing as "government health care". Government insurance for healthcare provided by private hospitals and pharmaceutical companies (which is what single-payer is) =/= government-provided healthcare.
Anyway all the best systems in the world are single-payer or variations of it. You can claim nationalized healthcare sucks all you want but the economic and logistic facts are against you.
I've asked twice, now three times, for a list of these countries with this great single payer health care. I want to know the names of these 36 countries right here on this page, and where you obtained this information. Because honestly, I believe you are just full of shit. But prove me wrong, is what I'm asking here.
Jeez, you really are way behind but the fact your open to proof "prove me wrong, is what I'm asking here" puts you infinitely ahead of a lot of Americans who need no proof.... They just know 'Americas the best'.
"Any man/woman who respects empirical evidence is already in the top 30% of thinkers without having to know anything else." -CmdrTobs 2008
The only way companies are able to "limit innovation" is via the government. That is why companies push for regulation because it means less competition. "Big Oil and Big Coal lobbies" are not products of capitalism, but corporatism. That is why the government should stay out of the economy because the market gets politicized as it did with the fossil fuel industry.
Also, innovation needs to have a rich buyer at first and then they can lower their prices so everyone can have access.
I'm sorry to break it to market fundamentalists but can limit innovation and invention even without the government. Oligopolies, just by the sheer fact of being oligopolies, provide barriers to entry for individuals and other companies. They can squeeze out new products by being able to drop prices and/or flood the market with their products in ways upstarts cannot.
But you are right that they often use the government as their tool to squeeze people out as well.
That is a wrong view of economics and empirically disproven. Without government intervention, monopolies either have to remain reasonably priced and innovated or eventually a competitor will arise. See: "The Non-Orwellian View of American History"
Not at all. One of the first things you learn about in Macroeconomics is the difference between how a theoretical free market works and how oligopolies work. Apparently you need to go back and read up on basic Econ. This is no mystery.
I should know. I'm an economist. If you know about econ you should know about "Natural Monopolies" that can occur even in a "free market" (which no capitalist system has ever been).
lol at the FM fundi nuts who claim regulation is responsible for the wealth/poor divide and cry "everyone would be rich if only the market had no regulation"
Every system of unregulated exchange means some get mega X. X being wealth in economics, X being temperature (Maxwell Boltzmann distro) and so on.. The whole natural world shows us this.
In eco its worse, cuz at least in a jar of gas the particles that manage to get really hot can't control the rest of the volume to keep others cool...
Worse yet, these nuts have re branded the term "Free market" to mean a market that is 'free from ALL regulation'. Which it never meant.
I want to know when the rich started whispering this into their ears telling them it will make them all into Henry Fords... Convincing them that the post war years of year on year rises in wages where 1 income could buy a house and feed a family was because of unregulated markets and super low corporate taxes.
@CmdrTobs, your arguement is getting a bit dry, you spend more time calling me an idiot instead of making valid points. Free market doesn't mean free from all regulation, thats laissez faire. However, if you think that all the government regulation is GOOD, you're retarded, period. They have driven all the manufacturing jobs overseas, we are a service based economy now, and you know why? Gee, could it be because the government? I dunno, maybe.
I'm sorry what I say is 'dry' compared to your pontifications that demand the existence of an international conspiracy to explain the US' 37# HC rank.
I've not made an argument. You don't even acknowledge there is a problem with HC.
How can I talk about a prescription to the HC situation whether it be a Public option or 'deregulation' when you refuse to acknowledge a problem, & furthermore attempt to 'invalidate' sources that say so.
I find it v. funny you thought we were having an argument.
@CmdrTobs, well, you just pointed out the problem, you aren't even arguing, at least you don't seem to be. You say we're 37th, buts that no arguement seeing as how you haven't proven in ONCE. I've asked for the list of countries and you've refused to give it. Your arguement is garbage. You know what the problem with our current HC system is? Government. And heres why.
All invalid, because of your 'theories' so why on earth should we talk about any solutions when one party (YOU), refuse to admit there is a problem in anyway.
Just look. your screaming about "Goverment" involvement before we have even reached the point where we agree a problem exsits. From your rhetoric all I can conclude is you think the US is 1# without argument.
Yet you are jumping the gun on a problem by screaming ZOMG the "Government"
You should read the suggested article - "The Non-Orwellian View of American History". It does a good job of debunking the monopoly/oligopoly myth. Empirically, the only time that monopolies have been able to thrive without innovating or keeping prices reasonable has been when the government was involved.
The "flooding" theory does indeed make sense, but it is not sustainable, and when it was tried in practice it did not work to keep out competitors forever.
I agree that oligopolies and monopolies cannot survive forever but they can survive long enough to do quite a bit of economic and logistic damage. Unfortunately.
You're right the vast majority of oligopolies and monopolies have been government-supported. But there have been a few that occurred naturally such as the water system in England. Whether or they would have survived without government intervention I guess we'll never know now since they became government-supported.
A public option with Absolutely no price controls or subsidized plans (this would be my compromise if I got the rest)
Complete deregulation of the health care and insurance industry
Allowing the purchase of insurance across state lines.
A tax credit for insurance that will refund 100% of the average market price for that individual. Find something cheaper, you get to keep the difference.
This would result in decreasing costs and higher quality.
I agree with points 3 and 4. I don't think 2 is a good idea because historically deregulation has not worked well. Capitalism by its nature requires regulation in order to curtail the growth of monopolies and oligarchies, ensure that barriers to entry and exit are low and ensure normal exchange. Deregulation requires blind trust in the honor system.
I partially agree with part 1 but with no price controls at all insurers can still charge whatever they want and keep costs high.
I disagree with your points on deregulation, however, since I likely won't convince you of my viewpoint, I included the public option. If you have a publicly owned insurance company it will provide the check that you want on the insurance companies to ensure that they won't hike up costs etc making regulation unnecessary even by your standards.
My main contention is that regulation is what keeps the costs high and that is why I want them abolished.
There is a myriad of issues why the costs are high. Part of it is regulation or over-regulation, part of it is deregulation which allows a lot of the profits to be diverted to filling executive pockets on insurance companies instead of providing treatment to people or funding medicine, part of it is the fact that Americans have so many health problems, part of it is because uninsured people often get treated in the ER which passes costs onto everyone else, etc.
I agree with everything you said, except for, once again the point about deregulation. But, wouldn't a public option without a profit motive solve for the issues you outlined without the need for regulation? My policy would solve for my problem of too much regulation and it would solve for your issue about the need for a check on the insurance companies. So the insurance companies would be free to do whatever they wanted, but they would still have to compete against the public plan.
lol yeah, but many got there info from the Republicans who said the public option means you "cannot buy private insurance the government will take over your healthcare, stop you seeing your doctor insurance illegal aliens first, kill your grandparents......"
I agree that complete deregulation with a strong public plan could work. One that would provide cover comparable to Medicare.
As without regional sales mandates private companies will pretty much pull out of certain communities. I mean, would you sell insurance to Gritz eating hilbilies when you can focus purely on the cosmo yoga practising city dwelling cohort?
I would be overall for such a system that guaranteed some choice and some elasticity in the market provided by a strong public O.
Agreed, but now you have to go back in time and explain to the slow to learn grinning masses who respect shouting, passionate black & white rhetorical and stubbornness as virtuous qualities about the validity of someone's argument that a Public Option won't kill their grandparents or "ration" their healthcare.
The argument wasn't so much that the public option would directly ration care, but the bill in general would. And of course, the older generation would be the first to be hurt by any rationing.
As seen in this video, it seems that the people who were worried about rationing were within reason.
Also, while I think that the best discourse is civilized, I can sympathize with the people who were shouting at their representatives because I am infuriated with Congress.
"rationing" - it was meaningless when it was used, there was NO mandate or specifics of when to stop peoples care.
If you are saying its rationing because the government does not have infinite money, then private care too must be "rationing" as the insurance company does not have infinite money and is underwritten to a limited amount.
In fact, I would say ANY private service will be "rationed" before any public one, after all the government can print money....
Empirically, the more government gets involved in HC, the more they control how much care people can get. It's happening in Mass and its happening in Europe. And now its explicitly in the bill.
Yes but insurance companies have to answer to their customers, preventing rationing. With the government, its purely political and 51% can ration the other 49% of people.
As far as the government printing money to fund health care, they do it now and it has inflated HC costs into oblivion.
1)In a public option we are talking about public 'health ins.' not any part of care providers. The care providers are ALL private. They would have no more reason to ration than they do now.
2)No. The nature of ins business means you never have to answer to customers, if they are disappointed, its too late.
The whole point the P.O is to stop the rescission of private ins. i.e actual rationing.
3)False. If that were true, government run HC like the NHS would be the most expensive in the world.
What a bizarre statement. So private insurance resources are infinite? The US governments Medicare resources are more infinite and not "CAPPED" compared to say Frances? Just think about what you are saying. I could say the reverse with not proof like you.
Its a bad point in any event, and a terrible point when you realised the burden of proving who's "CAPPING" patient care is on the AMERICAN SYSTEM when they have the worst healthcare in developed countries even though they spend the most.
I never said it was infinite. You are making an argument that the insurance companies set cost by spending more than they make which never happens. If it did, they they would go bankrupt, so you can see how you are setting up a strawman or a false dichotomy. The Government on the other hand will spend more than they receive in taxes and they will go into debt, print more money or raise taxes. This effects all American tax payers directly...
"I never said it was infinite" I I never said you said that, reread what I said, I said "More infinte" I.e to tend to infinitium. You need to reread what I wrote.
I can't really reply as you're commenting on things I have not said.
And when you say who is Capping health care you have to go to the source and the people who make the laws ALLOWING care to be capped. Which is what this video is all about. Its the Government.
And we do not have the worst care in developed countries... Arguably one of the best. I would be interested to see why you say we have the worst.
@RyandocDO You can't be serious. the U.S. is the ONLY developed country without a healthcare system. We are 47th in infant mortallity...right in there with Cuba, we spend MORE than any other nation and yet 40 Mill are uninsured or underinsured due to costs.
While we may be ahead of the world in medical technology, the fact is 60% of us can't afford to be treated.
You seem so dissatisfied with your lot, maybe you need to rethink your career. I wouldn't be interested in your services.
Infant mortality isn't a measure of health care. American doctors take babies that would die in other countries and help them survive. We save babies at 24 weeks and have procedures that allow their tiny little lungs to breath.
85-90% of American are covered and 85% of those people are happy with their insurance.
40 million people in our country areuninsured.. A 1/3 of those people are eligible for medicare and don't sign up, a 1/3 of those people make over 50k dollars a year and others illegal
What is capped in other countries with universal healthcare is the money paid to the medical community for their services. No PATIENT is denied healthcare..ever...
Doctors are free to charge what they wish but will only be compensated on a scale determined by the government.
Too bad about you...maybe you'll need to downsize your lifestyle a bit.
@172677 You don't seem to understand that if I am not willing to work and others are not willing to work then you won't get your health care. There will be waits for months. Because the Government is not paying what the market calls for. Many doctors already deny people with medicare because it costs more than what the government reimburses. Therefore, doctors who accept medicare are sometimes in the red by just seeing that patient.
Well, as an "official" recipient of Social Security and Medicare....whose circle of friends - and many family members are in a like position...across the U.S., I can say that nobody has been denied care, all have doctors, all have been treated.
Those doctors who opt out have a perfect right to do so...and so will you. Open a fee-based practice and treat the carriage trade. It's a free country.
I wouldn't want you as my physician anyway. Profit over patient isn't my idea of care.
I am going to finally say this to you and be done with it. I volunteer my time on a regular basis and once I am finished with my schooling I will continue to do so. If I am compensated well when I work then that allows me more time to provide Health Care for free because I will not be struggling and will have more time. I will do this where ever I am needed. Domestic or Foreign. I have much more to say, but I find it futile since you have ignored most of what I have said. Good luck to you.
Well, being "compensated well" is relative, isn't it.
I don't know ONE doctor ever in my entire life that was struggling...not one.
Well, maybe one exception. I was born in the Texas panhandle and a doctor from Amarillo would make housecalls to those living in the remote areas of that place. He was on the road 12-18 hours a day...every day....and was always available to those who lived out there.
@CmdrTobs It will increase taxes because the American government is grossly inefficient.Its like you are proving my point by just speaking. You say that the US Govt. already spends the most on HC yet they don't cover all Americans. To add more people to what the Government is already covering and then state that it won't increase taxes is ridiculous.
That is why in my estimation it should be reorganised into a single payer system. Its absurd to think that an America intrinsically can't run a system like a Frenchmen, which is why I'm forced to conclude it's the system.
Also, more people won't be added at current cost. Preventive care is a huge cost reducer which would go up. I am sure you understand this. The fact people in France NEVER have dialysis in an emergency room or have a heart attack after decades of undiagnosed H.B.P is testament.
I think that Americans should remain unique in the fact that they believe the PEOPLE have the ability to govern and take care of themselves and the people have the right and the duty to limit and check the government at every turn. So, having a single payer system is not in the best interest of how American culture works. We are not used and not so tolerant of governmental control. No matter how much of that is do to mere perception.
A publically owned insurance cooperation. (the public option ergo single payer) Is not government control.
Is NASA government control? Thought not.
Why is a company that passes on paid premiums to patient care with a 98% efficiency as opposed to private insurance with its 70% efficiency government control??? The hospitals are still private, the drug companys are still private.
You can only think single payer is government control if you watch Rush Limbo and don't understand the subject.
Single payer systems like England where the doctors are employed by the state is INDEED governmentally controlled. If docs get their pay check from the government I don't know what else to call it.
I simply don't want the government's nose in my business. Plain and simple. You can call it or spin it the way you want. I still don't want it. I don't have any problems with the health care I receive. Au revoir...
That's why I said France. Frances HC is better than Britain's anyway we could talk about Japan too. I can't see a problem with a 'NASA' like government Option collecting premiums and paying them out for care.
The fact remains the private ins. pockets at best 25%-30%. A government systems run at 3%-1% overheads.
Its not a matter of socialism or private enterprise. Its simply what works. Paying ins. Ceos $125m a year wages is a massive waste.
So is separate 250 billion dollar Bills that are secretly put passed to get doctors support of the HC bill. So is the 100 billion dollars given to a single state for its support. I'm very comfortable with insurance companies making a profit. I'm not comfortable with Government stealing my money and bribing interest groups with it.
Cont. I also am not one of the Americans that admire European culture or ways in terms of Government and socialism. I feel that we developed our system to get away from the rule of European traditions and Govt. Socialism is not a step forward in terms of history, but a step backwards. I also feel that the government is not a humanitarian institution it is an institution of protection from foreign invaders. Therefore, in my opinion its not the govt's place to provide HC.
That's funny, the European culture now was spawned by the same progessive people who founded America. 'Gov by consent' etc etc... Europe only has lords still by title not by power.
Euope ended up outlawing things like slavery before America.
If anything America these days has more of the old world left in it that Europe. Just look at evangelicals...
Single payer is not socialism. The boogie man rather than reality is used far too much in this debate.
I figure you are educated, but I don't know if you know much about American culture and our values of liberty and limited government?
You mention slavery and evangelicals as support for an argument that is moot and invalid.
The boogie man is the Government and the more you allow it to grow the less liberty you have. Best to keep that government small. Take care of yourself. I don't think this debate will increase my knowledge in any way so this is my last post.
I was mentioning slavery and Evangelicals to combat the once true but now dilapidated view you made that America is particulally free and individually empowering and progressive.
America's sole cliam to these things are as dated as Britians claim to rulling the waves, but the average american still belives them and thus thinks his systems are the best in the world. Where as the average brit would laugh if you said his nation rules the waves.
@RyandocDO There are no facts to support your statement...none.
What WILL happen is your cushy little tax cut that Bush gave to the wealthy will be rescinded....and other little bennys the wealthy enjoy, loopholes they find for avoiding taxes will be done away with and they will be called upon to join the rest of us in fair taxation.
Alright, you're stupid, I guess I could spend all year proving that to you, but you'd be to stupid to understand. I've already said twice now Government is the problem. Let me write that in all caps so you can comprende. GOVERNMENT IS THE PROBLEM STUPID. So the solution to fix the problem of government being the problem, would be getting government out of health care. ALright? Good, bye. Please don't respond with uh "But I don't get it" Because I'm not gonna answer.
I am not going to presume English is your first language so I won't be rude, but reread what I have said. Your response smacks of almost no English comprehension.
Option 2 is not really an option for me. As it would allow the insurance companies to behave like true capitalist enterprises. They would start adjusting premiums radically on race, location and other biometric data. Much like car insurance. I personally could not tolerate that with peoples a health. A country that would never leave a marine behind, but would leave a citizen behind because they had X,Y,Z risk factor genes and was from taxes had a poor credit score.... not good.
Except it is not working that way. There is PLENTY of innovation happening in Britain, Australia, Western Europe and Japan. For example, in Australia, we have created the Cochlear ear implant, spray on skin grafts for burns victims, several new vaccines, a cure for stomach ulcers, thats just off the top of my head. And if you look at the Nobel Prizewinners for Medicine over the last 20 years or so, you will find it full of Australians, Europeans and British people as well as Americans.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Government Health care will not lower cost, how uninformed do you have to be to actually believe that. Everyone who is tired of how high there health care is now, do you realize that we will pay taxes on this for 4 years while still having to have our own coverage until the government plan is put into motion. Paying double for 4 years, only to find out that most of the money(the reason all this is being done anyways) has been siphoned off, and we once again have to sacrifice. Wake the f up
The Conservatives, the Republicans, the so called "Tea Baggers" and "Faux News" have been telling you this shit was going to happen for the past year and you have been calling them quacks traitors and every other thing in the book. Public or Private, RATIONING is the ONLY way they can do this thing. That is the #1 reason us "nuts" are against it. I don't know of any Republican who is for this bill, so stop blaming them. They told you so, but you didn't listen. Just fucking trash the thing.
@johnscck There already is rationing with private enterprise. Even more so with this bill apparently. With a public *option* rationing criticisms become more muted.
I wouldn't exactly call our current health care system "private enterprise." The degree to which government is involved is incredibly high. I would argue that the reason rationing has become necessary is because of the government involvement. All the regulation, subsidies and price controls violently distort the market and make it much more difficult to innovate and to decrease prices. Moreover, this rationing is horrendous and scary and it will lead to even less innovation and higher prices.
wow... he was pointing out the hypocrisy of their position. They were all anti-rationing when it wasn't in the bill and now that it is irrefutably in the bill they dont care.
So they protested against rationing, you people called them idiots for making that claim and now that it is in the bill, you agree that it is right to blame the people who protested against it..?
1. No rationing in bill = teabaggers protest like crazy against rationing
2. Rationing is put into the bill but the rationing favours the ppl who organise the rallies (i.e. corporate interests).: Tea baggers don't say a word.
You dont see a problem with this? The ppl who protest are used as tools by corporate groups. IF they werent then they would protest 1000x harder then ever right now. but they wont because they arnt told to.
Omg your outlook is so childish, I hope you aren't an adult because this is embarrassing. The teapartiers claimed that the healthcare reform bill would result in rationing (which is obvious). They protest this, you people call them idiots. Rationing gets put in which was inevitable, you people blame the people who protested it. The protesters turned up by themselves, they weren't payed, idiots who say people are controlled by corporate interests are idiots.
tea parties claimed that a public option would lead to rationing (which it wouldnt).
then in the senate version of HC a different kind of rationing gets put in and they dont do anything. noone is blaming them for it being put in the bill. ppl are just pointing out that they only protest against what they perceive to be 'rationing' when it is against the large insurers interests. no consistency
lots of them showed up in buses organised by insurers and given pre-made signs to protest with.
No i dont think there would be rationing in a public option. It would be just like any other insurance product except it is run by the government. They would offer coverage for certain illnesses for a certain price. If you WANT TO then you buy it. Otherwise dont buy it. its an OPTION. noone will force you to do anything.
if that is rationing then i guess every insurance product in the history of the world is rationed.
i thought you were referring to one of the house bills because of the past tense used in your msg. because if you had read the bill prior to this week there would have been no rationing in it.
Come on Capitalism is Rationing. If you don't have enough money you don't get want you want. You get what you can afford. I just believe it should be rationed between a patient and doctor not between another big f'd up insurance conglomerates CEO & CFO. No mandatory health insurance.
Our government is Fascist. Not just the current administration/Congress, but all their predecessors. Corporatism combined with big socialist/imperialist government is the very definition of fascism. Industry and government colluding to run our lives and exploit us while denying us our constitutionally mandated liberties.
Like it or not, we have a one party system - THEM, the political/corporate class
Nothing to worry about.
Obama's friendly unions that pushed this bill have been exempeted from it.
ekajeht 1 year ago
Sarah Palin did state this, and she was mocked and made fun of by the liberal loons. Sounds like you forget very easily. And, where are the liberals on this? The Whitehouse has more interest in helping foreign nations and nationals then helping Americans.
duvexy 1 year ago
Health insurance companies wrote the fucking bill dipshits..nothing good in that bill for us, they spent 98% of their lobbying budget fighting to get this corporate piece of shit legislation passed. Congrats sheep..freedom is dead.
chriscr123 1 year ago
Wow...These Turks can put a spin on shit, huh. He claims the public option would not allow for rationing. He must not be aware of the rationing that goes on with the public option known as Medicare. And when I was active duty, I had to seek private health care for my ankle injury because the government would not fund its treatment. Yeah, keep chanting the graces of public option. Fools.
whtsdadeal 1 year ago
@whtsdadeal Well that's cause America is a shit nation anyway. Don't blame Universal Health Care because your excuse for a country can't do it.
EziekielNightwind 1 year ago
To have TYT explain it, sounds like the repubs are the ones behind the healthcare bill.
Nevermind that every single repub voted against the bill.
And never mind that it was democrat obama which signed it into law...
No no, it was the repubs and the "teabaggers" that were unwittingly used by none other than "big oil" to get H/C raitioning inserted into the bill.
LMAO at the logic of TYT. You have to be in denial to think that it was none other than democrats that passed this bill into law.
rllang01 1 year ago
campaign for liberty's never stopped protesting against healthcare and we also organized the first tea party during ron paul's election.. of course cenk pays so little to real grassroots movements that he wouldn't know. if he left actually has any real grassroots movement going they would know a lot more about what's going on instead of generalizing every protester into one bundle.
spyletu 2 years ago
the left*
spyletu 2 years ago
You americans keep voting for shitty parties and shitty presidents.
Here is your reward; Die a horrible death from a treatable ailment.
Now, over in "communist" Europe, my father actually have been on a treatment that costs 200 000 dollars a year. For five years.
But yeah, no, "socialist" healthcare could never work! WE NEED MOAR FREE MARKET!!!
DrakeIcn 2 years ago 18
You are GOD, if ever there was one.
SupermarketsRevil 2 years ago
Having too much freedom is daunting and actually keeps other freedoms to be easily obtained. That's the paradox of too many choices. I want a different type of choice to be offered, the choice to have either one easy option where the government does it all for you, or where you do everything for yourself.
We argue between "simple but controlled by another party" and "full control, but not very accessible". What about the option to choose between both?
ccricers 2 years ago
I hope you realize now why some of us just want the Government out of our business. They are INCAPABLE to get it right. I am still very much against the Health Care bill... And I am sure many of the tea bag parties are still holding parties you just aren't looking for them. And yet you are STILL the idiot who trust Government to do the right thing. Hopelessly an idiot.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
Your argument proves that you are a lacky of the insurance companies. They do NOTHING for their money except take a cut of the premium as the middle man. They perform NO services and their board of directors decide who gets care and who doesn't.
It's time to put them out of business before more people die....
If you don't like being regulated, then, take your own advice and go somewhere else....oh, wait....they ALL have govt insurance...jeez. Rethink your career. Plumber maybe?
172677 2 years ago
@172677 Replacing a middle-man with someone who has no power over you for another middle-man that can put you in jail or draft you into war is beyond stupid. The insurance comapnies only get away with what the Government allows them to get away with.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
Wrong logic. Insurance companies have no power of YOU, the doctor...they do, however, have the power over US, the patient....THEY decide our medical care..not the doctors.
And, in case you haven't heard, there is no draft.
You're right about the insurance companies have been allowed to run rampant over us....but that's coming to a fast and screeching halt.
They, like you, may have to find some other way to make a living.
172677 2 years ago
@172677 Well, good luck finding health care once again. If you want it Wallmart Cheap you will have wallmart quality.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
As a person who has yet to treat ONE patient for anything, I'll just say this.
Unlike you, MOST doctors are practicing because they love what they do...and are good at it....and don't give a rat where their fees come from. They care about the people who walk into their office.
You don't seem to be doctor material...maybe go work on wall street where greed is good.
172677 2 years ago
Although I haven't treated many patients I have treated some. Of course under a licensed doctor's supervision. That was all for free and voluntary on the part of the doc and I. I am volunteering my time twice in the next two months helping homeless families receive health care and volunteering my time to help with care at a cancer fundraiser. So if you think I am only after the ":bottom line" you are wrong. And I don't think explaining my situation anymore to you will help. You are kinda dense.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
It's not that Americans can't afford health insurance, it's that they can't afford all the shit they bought instead of health insurance. Typical dems giving everything away for a vote to gain power. Clueless....
dirtyshortsPU 2 years ago
Geesh, did the insurance companies get a blowjob with that too? Wow, if it serves the insurance companies, screws the middle and working class, and leads to higher profits, then it must be ok. Business as usual, fuck 'em all.
MagnesDrachen13 2 years ago
Of course the Republicans aren't against this. The Democrats and Republicans are not conservatives and liberals. There is no ideology. Washington is a trough where our "representatives" feed on our money and consolidate power. By making this a dem v rep argument, THEY WIN. That was the problem with the healthcare bill to begin with, not death panels and taxes. WE surrender more freedom.
bootlegpreacher 2 years ago 5
The hilarious thing about the campaign against the public option was that they were able to cry "government rationing!" and "government doesn't have a bottom line!" without realizing the irony in that.
yohaneuano4 2 years ago
This is what people were trying to tell you all along and all you did was call them names.
Just because I see things wrong with something doesn't mean I am a wingnut. I just see something wrong, period.
Better to not divide ourselves when dealing with politicians.
wetweasel56 2 years ago
Eh? We are calling them names because they are not being consistant.
They should be out protesting!!! If they're grass roots they should be protesting the government mandating limits! GO TEA BAGGERS! Oh wait there not doing it now.
Because rush limbo is not hyping it, industry is not sponsoring it....
More evidence to show they don't understand the issues and they're mindless idiots. 1/4 of them were holding misspelt signs calling Obama a MUSLIM TSARIST COMMUNIST.
Utter Buffoons.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
Whenever Govnerment is involved with any program, it becomes more responsive to inflation, thats a simple fact. The Government lays down red tape making it difficult for these companies and hospitals to obtain the cheapest medication, and don't associate cheap with the quality, because the quality is just fine with the cheaper stuff. Did you know many doctors refuse medicare patients simply because all the red tape involved?
Retic92 2 years ago
What blows my mind is that they're going to pass the bill in this format so that after it's passed they can bring it up so that everyone will STILL be freaked out and still buy private healthcare because "they cover you no matter what!" This is fucking garbage America. I still feel bad for you.
capnquack 2 years ago
While my OHIP here in Canada doesn't cover the 'minor' things (like non-essential drugs/xrays/therapies) - if I got Cancer, there is no upper limit. None. Not even if I got cancer in every freaking organ and had to get 56 transplants and 275 surgeries. Not even if after being cured of that I develop something worse. OHIP covers you where it counts - not where the government has opted to say that it costs them too much for you to live.
capnquack 2 years ago
yes, the main limits are transplant organs which are rationed and damn ZOMG they should be. A 70yr old does not get a new heart over a 20yr old and I don't give a FUCK how much money the old geezer has.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
This healthcare shit is the reason alot of people couldnt keep a job even before unemployment started to skyrocket.. A company hires you on a probationary period usually 60 to 90 days and then to avoid giving you insurance they work you 59 to 89 days and fire your ass with no explanation. This shit has gone on for years and years.
dustin8420 2 years ago
The Republicans are AGAINST this. Your Dems effed this up and you set up the strawman to blame. What real Republicans are for this crap? Name names.
pageram 2 years ago
First they stuff the ballot box with millions of fake names. Next they spend trillions to go no where. Then they railroad a "health care" bill through to take over a third of the economy and increase taxes for all working people.
If you've ever wondered what it was like to live in 1860, I can tell you, that is where we are right now. When families are being jailed or forced to foreclose when they can't afford the taxes on Obamacare, this country will tear itself apart. People are pissed.
mbsells77 2 years ago
thank fuck we have a national health service and not private & corporate hospitals dominating the uk
CyberRedJim1986 2 years ago
This is all fancy-danicing. The ultimate goal of all this surrounding healthcare reform is single payer insurance.
Single payer is the ONLY one that will be true reform..... This bill from the Senate will be signed ..then it will go into meetings with the House, where the public option will be put back in....Obama will sign it...and in a few years, when it doesn't work, the single payer will be brought in..more along the lines of Medicare
.
The rest of this is all noise........
172677 2 years ago
You sir are an idiot...
Single payer are you kidding..?
That would fuck the economy so so bad.
willsbanana 2 years ago
I'm a woman, thank you.
Single payer is the only one that will keep costs down and has been the goal of the entire reform actions.
It's the only one that will guarantee equal healthcare at truly affordable prices.
It has been the goal of Obama and the Democrats since the beginning. This shouldn't be "news" --- Obama and others have said it for over a year now.
All this nonsense is just the process and nothing but fancy - dancing. As long as Dems have control, that's the deal.
172677 2 years ago
@172677 I tell you right now that if there a single payer system in this country I will find some place else to be a doctor. So enjoy your equal healthcare. I hope you can find someone to provide it.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
@Ryan And, I will tell you that if you are really a doctor, you care more for profit than for your patients.
Most doctors practice medicine to help heal the sick - no matter their economic status. There are a few, such as yourself, that are more interested in the bottom line.
You, sir, should open a Cadillac practice, cash only, and cater to the wealthy who will pay you out of their pocket. You are of no use at all to the working family or those who cannot afford insurance -- or your prices.
172677 2 years ago
@172677 I am a second year medical student and I have accumulated over 100k dollars worth of debt already. I wasn't worried about my debt until the Government threaten to step in and regulate everything. Including how much I will be payed. I entered the profession to help people, but I didn't enter the profession to become a slave to the people either. I would like my 18 hour days of studying to pay off. I don't think that is too much to ask for.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
Well, if you don't like the heat, stay out of the kitchen. As a "second year" medical student, you have no experience at all and plenty of time to change your major.
Most doctors enter the profession for reasons other than how much money they make.
As for your student loans....well, join the crowd. There are plenty others who are in the same boat. Medical students aren't exempt, for sure.
172677 2 years ago
I have one-hundred-thousand-dollars-worth-of-debt... I am now a slave to the system... I CAN NOT FIND something else to do. I will OWE a house before I even make one cent. You don't seem to understand or care what it is that I will go thru. Or the fact that as soon as I get out of school I will have what is equivalent to a house payment before I even have a house.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
Look, bub, nobody is twisting your arm and forcing you to take on the debt. You have choices....and medicine doesn't seem to be a good fit for you.
LOTS of people accrue debt while in college.....all professions.... Why do you think you are any different.
As I said previously, find another career.
172677 2 years ago
Why don't you provide some data to go with that?
You do understand, you always have to include the 'WHY' as well as what you 'THINK'.
Show us a country that spends more privately on healthcare? They all spend less.
Show us a country that spends more PUBLIC money on care than the US and what shape their economies are in?
The US($2364) is ALREADY right now spending more public money than France($2080).
The US is one of the worlds biggest "socialised" HC systems.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
That was the entire point of the health care opposition. We have been saying that it would lead to rationing as it does in all other nations with universal health care, and now we have been vindicated. I am quite frankly appalled at this sell out to the insurance companies. These people that craft these bills have no sense of morality or economics.
tynews2001 2 years ago
Have you even VISITED nations with universal healthcare? IT IS NOT RATIONED NEARLY as much as in the US where the insurance is rationed, to ensure the profit of the healthcare companies in some cases, and overprescribed to ensure the profit of healthcare companies in others.
For all the money the US is paying (twice as much all up) for healthcare, life expectancy is lower and infant mortality is much higher in the US than in the rest of the Western World.
dangerouslytalented 2 years ago
Visiting them is not the point. I have, however, read studies about these other nations. The main problem with life expectancy in America, is we have much more unhealthy lifestyles and take more risks than other nations. If you exclude deaths that have nothing to do with the health care system, we would be number one in life expectancy.
See: The Grass is not always Greener
tynews2001 2 years ago
Holy fucking shit.
keytoothed 2 years ago
I am done with the Democratic Party. I am voting independent from now on. This health insurance is a joke. No public option but we are still going to make it illegal to be uninsured and limit coverage! They had this planed from the get go! How can they DO THIS!!!! It is insane!
jjwrom 2 years ago
Best of luck with that. Better to focus your energy on pushing Dems to do the right things rather than hand elections over to Republicans.
indiesixtynine 2 years ago
@indiesixtynine If they give us a law that mandates us to buy private insurance instead of public health care like promised, I am finished. We all should be. That would be the biggest betrayal possible!
jjwrom 2 years ago
The problem is that too many corrupt democrats are winning nomination.
The noly way to get rid of THESE is to vote and campaign in the primaries.
dangerouslytalented 2 years ago
Kill the upper 1%, take their money... and give it to poor people everywhere.
dustin8420 2 years ago 2
That is morally reprehensible.
tynews2001 2 years ago
All of the top healthcare systems in the world are all nationalized healthcare systems. There is not a single successful private healthcare model on a national scale. The US's private system is ranked 37th place in the world. All the cheapest systems are public nationalized systems.
A86 2 years ago 2
You know you are arguing with idiots on this issue when in this rare case its beyond doubt.
At least with issues like finance there is no clear example of what is 100% right or wrong.
But on this issue there are 20+ top examples of countries with same/worse and greater wealth per capita around the world that do HC better.
Imagine if other debates were this easy. Imagine 36 countries had electric cars with better mileage and lower cost, would the right wingers still argue? Probably.....
CmdrTobs 2 years ago 4
@A86, I want you to go back to wherever you got this information...and LIST those 36 countries that have better health care than us. Because common sense says that when you have to offer health care to everyone there is inherently going to be rationing, so there is no way socialized health care is better. Capitalism means innovation, and thats why rich ppl from all these "great" health care systems come here for care.
Retic92 2 years ago
This isn't a secret:
(dot) photius (dot) com / rankings / healthranks (dot) html
If you don't know this you're way behind in this discussion.
And no, there is no major rationing in these countries. The private insurers ration because providing service is a cost. The goal in capitalism is to minimize costs and maximize profits. To provide as little service as possible to the fewest people while charging them the highest amount possible maximizes profit.
A86 2 years ago 4
"Capitalism means innovation"
Actually-existing capitalism limits innovation that is detrimental to the profits of oligopolies. Look how alternative energy is blocked by Big Oil and Big Coal lobbies.
Anyway, even though the US was the biggest inventor/innovator in medicine doesn't mean the average citizen readily has access to it. You pointed that out by pointing out that it's mostly rich people who get the best healthcare in the US. Doesn't really mean much to the average citizen.
A86 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@A86, yeah, you're talking about the bastardization of capitalism, great, you realize what government regulation in the market does, good job. Which brings up a good point, more capitalism, less government involvement, better health care. Government health care is garbage, period. Oh yeah, about those 36 other countries you were talking about that have better health care than us...
Retic92 2 years ago
That's talking about government helping certain private companies block other ones. That's government aiding certain companies, not "regulating" them.
There is not nor has there ever been a single private healthcare system that is successful at a level beyond local. All national-level private healthcare systems are expensive and inefficient. There are some things markets are not good at just like there are some things governments are not good at.
A86 2 years ago 4
"Government health care is garbage"
There is no such thing as "government health care". Government insurance for healthcare provided by private hospitals and pharmaceutical companies (which is what single-payer is) =/= government-provided healthcare.
Anyway all the best systems in the world are single-payer or variations of it. You can claim nationalized healthcare sucks all you want but the economic and logistic facts are against you.
A86 2 years ago 4
I've asked twice, now three times, for a list of these countries with this great single payer health care. I want to know the names of these 36 countries right here on this page, and where you obtained this information. Because honestly, I believe you are just full of shit. But prove me wrong, is what I'm asking here.
Retic92 2 years ago
I listed it earlier. Open this link:
(dot) photius (dot) com / rankings / healthranks (dot) html
Number one is France. Number two and three are Italy and San Marino. The US is number thirty-seventh down just above Slovenia and Cuba.
"I believe you are full of shit"
Just because you don't know much about this topic doesn't mean this information doesn't exist. Come on now.
A86 2 years ago 4
Jeez, you really are way behind but the fact your open to proof "prove me wrong, is what I'm asking here" puts you infinitely ahead of a lot of Americans who need no proof.... They just know 'Americas the best'.
"Any man/woman who respects empirical evidence is already in the top 30% of thinkers without having to know anything else." -CmdrTobs 2008
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
The only way companies are able to "limit innovation" is via the government. That is why companies push for regulation because it means less competition. "Big Oil and Big Coal lobbies" are not products of capitalism, but corporatism. That is why the government should stay out of the economy because the market gets politicized as it did with the fossil fuel industry.
Also, innovation needs to have a rich buyer at first and then they can lower their prices so everyone can have access.
tynews2001 2 years ago
I'm sorry to break it to market fundamentalists but can limit innovation and invention even without the government. Oligopolies, just by the sheer fact of being oligopolies, provide barriers to entry for individuals and other companies. They can squeeze out new products by being able to drop prices and/or flood the market with their products in ways upstarts cannot.
But you are right that they often use the government as their tool to squeeze people out as well.
A86 2 years ago
That is a wrong view of economics and empirically disproven. Without government intervention, monopolies either have to remain reasonably priced and innovated or eventually a competitor will arise. See: "The Non-Orwellian View of American History"
tynews2001 2 years ago
Not at all. One of the first things you learn about in Macroeconomics is the difference between how a theoretical free market works and how oligopolies work. Apparently you need to go back and read up on basic Econ. This is no mystery.
I should know. I'm an economist. If you know about econ you should know about "Natural Monopolies" that can occur even in a "free market" (which no capitalist system has ever been).
A86 2 years ago
lol at the FM fundi nuts who claim regulation is responsible for the wealth/poor divide and cry "everyone would be rich if only the market had no regulation"
Every system of unregulated exchange means some get mega X. X being wealth in economics, X being temperature (Maxwell Boltzmann distro) and so on.. The whole natural world shows us this.
In eco its worse, cuz at least in a jar of gas the particles that manage to get really hot can't control the rest of the volume to keep others cool...
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
Worse yet, these nuts have re branded the term "Free market" to mean a market that is 'free from ALL regulation'. Which it never meant.
I want to know when the rich started whispering this into their ears telling them it will make them all into Henry Fords... Convincing them that the post war years of year on year rises in wages where 1 income could buy a house and feed a family was because of unregulated markets and super low corporate taxes.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
@CmdrTobs, your arguement is getting a bit dry, you spend more time calling me an idiot instead of making valid points. Free market doesn't mean free from all regulation, thats laissez faire. However, if you think that all the government regulation is GOOD, you're retarded, period. They have driven all the manufacturing jobs overseas, we are a service based economy now, and you know why? Gee, could it be because the government? I dunno, maybe.
Retic92 2 years ago
I'm sorry what I say is 'dry' compared to your pontifications that demand the existence of an international conspiracy to explain the US' 37# HC rank.
I've not made an argument. You don't even acknowledge there is a problem with HC.
How can I talk about a prescription to the HC situation whether it be a Public option or 'deregulation' when you refuse to acknowledge a problem, & furthermore attempt to 'invalidate' sources that say so.
I find it v. funny you thought we were having an argument.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
@CmdrTobs, well, you just pointed out the problem, you aren't even arguing, at least you don't seem to be. You say we're 37th, buts that no arguement seeing as how you haven't proven in ONCE. I've asked for the list of countries and you've refused to give it. Your arguement is garbage. You know what the problem with our current HC system is? Government. And heres why.
Retic92 2 years ago
I have cited sources the WHO, CIA etc....
All invalid, because of your 'theories' so why on earth should we talk about any solutions when one party (YOU), refuse to admit there is a problem in anyway.
Just look. your screaming about "Goverment" involvement before we have even reached the point where we agree a problem exsits. From your rhetoric all I can conclude is you think the US is 1# without argument.
Yet you are jumping the gun on a problem by screaming ZOMG the "Government"
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
You should read the suggested article - "The Non-Orwellian View of American History". It does a good job of debunking the monopoly/oligopoly myth. Empirically, the only time that monopolies have been able to thrive without innovating or keeping prices reasonable has been when the government was involved.
The "flooding" theory does indeed make sense, but it is not sustainable, and when it was tried in practice it did not work to keep out competitors forever.
tynews2001 2 years ago
I agree that oligopolies and monopolies cannot survive forever but they can survive long enough to do quite a bit of economic and logistic damage. Unfortunately.
You're right the vast majority of oligopolies and monopolies have been government-supported. But there have been a few that occurred naturally such as the water system in England. Whether or they would have survived without government intervention I guess we'll never know now since they became government-supported.
A86 2 years ago
I agree with everything you said.
Would you agree with the statement that the current monopoly on health care is government created?
Would you be supportive of removing barriers from purchasing health insurance across state lines?
tynews2001 2 years ago
@tynews2001 Yep, I agree. Though I think that's only the beginning.
A86 2 years ago
Would you agree with this policy idea:
A public option with Absolutely no price controls or subsidized plans (this would be my compromise if I got the rest)
Complete deregulation of the health care and insurance industry
Allowing the purchase of insurance across state lines.
A tax credit for insurance that will refund 100% of the average market price for that individual. Find something cheaper, you get to keep the difference.
This would result in decreasing costs and higher quality.
tynews2001 2 years ago
I agree with points 3 and 4. I don't think 2 is a good idea because historically deregulation has not worked well. Capitalism by its nature requires regulation in order to curtail the growth of monopolies and oligarchies, ensure that barriers to entry and exit are low and ensure normal exchange. Deregulation requires blind trust in the honor system.
I partially agree with part 1 but with no price controls at all insurers can still charge whatever they want and keep costs high.
A86 2 years ago
I disagree with your points on deregulation, however, since I likely won't convince you of my viewpoint, I included the public option. If you have a publicly owned insurance company it will provide the check that you want on the insurance companies to ensure that they won't hike up costs etc making regulation unnecessary even by your standards.
My main contention is that regulation is what keeps the costs high and that is why I want them abolished.
tynews2001 2 years ago
There is a myriad of issues why the costs are high. Part of it is regulation or over-regulation, part of it is deregulation which allows a lot of the profits to be diverted to filling executive pockets on insurance companies instead of providing treatment to people or funding medicine, part of it is the fact that Americans have so many health problems, part of it is because uninsured people often get treated in the ER which passes costs onto everyone else, etc.
A86 2 years ago
I agree with everything you said, except for, once again the point about deregulation. But, wouldn't a public option without a profit motive solve for the issues you outlined without the need for regulation? My policy would solve for my problem of too much regulation and it would solve for your issue about the need for a check on the insurance companies. So the insurance companies would be free to do whatever they wanted, but they would still have to compete against the public plan.
tynews2001 2 years ago
Actually that was the logic behind the Public Option all along. Lol.
A86 2 years ago
lol yeah, but many got there info from the Republicans who said the public option means you "cannot buy private insurance the government will take over your healthcare, stop you seeing your doctor insurance illegal aliens first, kill your grandparents......"
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
I agree that complete deregulation with a strong public plan could work. One that would provide cover comparable to Medicare.
As without regional sales mandates private companies will pretty much pull out of certain communities. I mean, would you sell insurance to Gritz eating hilbilies when you can focus purely on the cosmo yoga practising city dwelling cohort?
I would be overall for such a system that guaranteed some choice and some elasticity in the market provided by a strong public O.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
I'm glad we have found a compromise...
I would much prefer this to the monstrosity currently emerging from the senate and I think that it would solve most of the problems with health care.
tynews2001 2 years ago
Agreed, but now you have to go back in time and explain to the slow to learn grinning masses who respect shouting, passionate black & white rhetorical and stubbornness as virtuous qualities about the validity of someone's argument that a Public Option won't kill their grandparents or "ration" their healthcare.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
The argument wasn't so much that the public option would directly ration care, but the bill in general would. And of course, the older generation would be the first to be hurt by any rationing.
As seen in this video, it seems that the people who were worried about rationing were within reason.
Also, while I think that the best discourse is civilized, I can sympathize with the people who were shouting at their representatives because I am infuriated with Congress.
tynews2001 2 years ago
hohoho. Merry X-mas.
"rationing" - it was meaningless when it was used, there was NO mandate or specifics of when to stop peoples care.
If you are saying its rationing because the government does not have infinite money, then private care too must be "rationing" as the insurance company does not have infinite money and is underwritten to a limited amount.
In fact, I would say ANY private service will be "rationed" before any public one, after all the government can print money....
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
Empirically, the more government gets involved in HC, the more they control how much care people can get. It's happening in Mass and its happening in Europe. And now its explicitly in the bill.
Yes but insurance companies have to answer to their customers, preventing rationing. With the government, its purely political and 51% can ration the other 49% of people.
As far as the government printing money to fund health care, they do it now and it has inflated HC costs into oblivion.
tynews2001 2 years ago
1)In a public option we are talking about public 'health ins.' not any part of care providers. The care providers are ALL private. They would have no more reason to ration than they do now.
2)No. The nature of ins business means you never have to answer to customers, if they are disappointed, its too late.
The whole point the P.O is to stop the rescission of private ins. i.e actual rationing.
3)False. If that were true, government run HC like the NHS would be the most expensive in the world.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
@CmdrTobs But it will bankrupt the country and increase taxes.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
Why would it increase taxes, American tax payers spend the MOST in the world.
Yes Americans already spend more public money than ALL single payers in the world bar 1 or 2 countries.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
@CmdrTobs That is because most socialized countries set costs. The country only spends a CAPPED amount of money per year.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
What a bizarre statement. So private insurance resources are infinite? The US governments Medicare resources are more infinite and not "CAPPED" compared to say Frances? Just think about what you are saying. I could say the reverse with not proof like you.
Its a bad point in any event, and a terrible point when you realised the burden of proving who's "CAPPING" patient care is on the AMERICAN SYSTEM when they have the worst healthcare in developed countries even though they spend the most.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
I never said it was infinite. You are making an argument that the insurance companies set cost by spending more than they make which never happens. If it did, they they would go bankrupt, so you can see how you are setting up a strawman or a false dichotomy. The Government on the other hand will spend more than they receive in taxes and they will go into debt, print more money or raise taxes. This effects all American tax payers directly...
RyandocDO 2 years ago
"I never said it was infinite" I I never said you said that, reread what I said, I said "More infinte" I.e to tend to infinitium. You need to reread what I wrote.
I can't really reply as you're commenting on things I have not said.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
IF this is not what you are saying then what is your point?
RyandocDO 2 years ago
No offence, just read it.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
None taken. I did.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
Cont.
And when you say who is Capping health care you have to go to the source and the people who make the laws ALLOWING care to be capped. Which is what this video is all about. Its the Government.
And we do not have the worst care in developed countries... Arguably one of the best. I would be interested to see why you say we have the worst.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
@RyandocDO You can't be serious. the U.S. is the ONLY developed country without a healthcare system. We are 47th in infant mortallity...right in there with Cuba, we spend MORE than any other nation and yet 40 Mill are uninsured or underinsured due to costs.
While we may be ahead of the world in medical technology, the fact is 60% of us can't afford to be treated.
You seem so dissatisfied with your lot, maybe you need to rethink your career. I wouldn't be interested in your services.
172677 2 years ago
You are incapable of understanding my point of view. Maybe, you should rethink, if you are capable of doing so, debating with people online.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
Infant mortality isn't a measure of health care. American doctors take babies that would die in other countries and help them survive. We save babies at 24 weeks and have procedures that allow their tiny little lungs to breath.
85-90% of American are covered and 85% of those people are happy with their insurance.
40 million people in our country areuninsured.. A 1/3 of those people are eligible for medicare and don't sign up, a 1/3 of those people make over 50k dollars a year and others illegal
RyandocDO 2 years ago
What is capped in other countries with universal healthcare is the money paid to the medical community for their services. No PATIENT is denied healthcare..ever...
Doctors are free to charge what they wish but will only be compensated on a scale determined by the government.
Too bad about you...maybe you'll need to downsize your lifestyle a bit.
172677 2 years ago
@172677 You don't seem to understand that if I am not willing to work and others are not willing to work then you won't get your health care. There will be waits for months. Because the Government is not paying what the market calls for. Many doctors already deny people with medicare because it costs more than what the government reimburses. Therefore, doctors who accept medicare are sometimes in the red by just seeing that patient.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
Well, as an "official" recipient of Social Security and Medicare....whose circle of friends - and many family members are in a like position...across the U.S., I can say that nobody has been denied care, all have doctors, all have been treated.
Those doctors who opt out have a perfect right to do so...and so will you. Open a fee-based practice and treat the carriage trade. It's a free country.
I wouldn't want you as my physician anyway. Profit over patient isn't my idea of care.
172677 2 years ago
I am going to finally say this to you and be done with it. I volunteer my time on a regular basis and once I am finished with my schooling I will continue to do so. If I am compensated well when I work then that allows me more time to provide Health Care for free because I will not be struggling and will have more time. I will do this where ever I am needed. Domestic or Foreign. I have much more to say, but I find it futile since you have ignored most of what I have said. Good luck to you.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
Well, being "compensated well" is relative, isn't it.
I don't know ONE doctor ever in my entire life that was struggling...not one.
Well, maybe one exception. I was born in the Texas panhandle and a doctor from Amarillo would make housecalls to those living in the remote areas of that place. He was on the road 12-18 hours a day...every day....and was always available to those who lived out there.
Often, he was paid in chickens and cornbread.
At least he could eat.
172677 2 years ago
@CmdrTobs It will increase taxes because the American government is grossly inefficient.Its like you are proving my point by just speaking. You say that the US Govt. already spends the most on HC yet they don't cover all Americans. To add more people to what the Government is already covering and then state that it won't increase taxes is ridiculous.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
That is why in my estimation it should be reorganised into a single payer system. Its absurd to think that an America intrinsically can't run a system like a Frenchmen, which is why I'm forced to conclude it's the system.
Also, more people won't be added at current cost. Preventive care is a huge cost reducer which would go up. I am sure you understand this. The fact people in France NEVER have dialysis in an emergency room or have a heart attack after decades of undiagnosed H.B.P is testament.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
I think that Americans should remain unique in the fact that they believe the PEOPLE have the ability to govern and take care of themselves and the people have the right and the duty to limit and check the government at every turn. So, having a single payer system is not in the best interest of how American culture works. We are not used and not so tolerant of governmental control. No matter how much of that is do to mere perception.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
A publically owned insurance cooperation. (the public option ergo single payer) Is not government control.
Is NASA government control? Thought not.
Why is a company that passes on paid premiums to patient care with a 98% efficiency as opposed to private insurance with its 70% efficiency government control??? The hospitals are still private, the drug companys are still private.
You can only think single payer is government control if you watch Rush Limbo and don't understand the subject.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
Single payer systems like England where the doctors are employed by the state is INDEED governmentally controlled. If docs get their pay check from the government I don't know what else to call it.
I simply don't want the government's nose in my business. Plain and simple. You can call it or spin it the way you want. I still don't want it. I don't have any problems with the health care I receive. Au revoir...
RyandocDO 2 years ago
That's why I said France. Frances HC is better than Britain's anyway we could talk about Japan too. I can't see a problem with a 'NASA' like government Option collecting premiums and paying them out for care.
The fact remains the private ins. pockets at best 25%-30%. A government systems run at 3%-1% overheads.
Its not a matter of socialism or private enterprise. Its simply what works. Paying ins. Ceos $125m a year wages is a massive waste.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
So is separate 250 billion dollar Bills that are secretly put passed to get doctors support of the HC bill. So is the 100 billion dollars given to a single state for its support. I'm very comfortable with insurance companies making a profit. I'm not comfortable with Government stealing my money and bribing interest groups with it.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
The ins. corps directly this year gave congress more than they ever have ($300m+) to do reform to increase their profits.
So now America has a HC bill that caused their share price to rocket.
They take premiums that should go to care and spend it to lobby Gov.
Where if a 'NASA like' agency pooled care money with near no overheads this corruption couldn't occur
Private ins. gives the Gov more money in tax from there profits, more than any Public option could.
You have it backwards.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
Cont. I also am not one of the Americans that admire European culture or ways in terms of Government and socialism. I feel that we developed our system to get away from the rule of European traditions and Govt. Socialism is not a step forward in terms of history, but a step backwards. I also feel that the government is not a humanitarian institution it is an institution of protection from foreign invaders. Therefore, in my opinion its not the govt's place to provide HC.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
That's funny, the European culture now was spawned by the same progessive people who founded America. 'Gov by consent' etc etc... Europe only has lords still by title not by power.
Euope ended up outlawing things like slavery before America.
If anything America these days has more of the old world left in it that Europe. Just look at evangelicals...
Single payer is not socialism. The boogie man rather than reality is used far too much in this debate.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
I figure you are educated, but I don't know if you know much about American culture and our values of liberty and limited government?
You mention slavery and evangelicals as support for an argument that is moot and invalid.
The boogie man is the Government and the more you allow it to grow the less liberty you have. Best to keep that government small. Take care of yourself. I don't think this debate will increase my knowledge in any way so this is my last post.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
I was mentioning slavery and Evangelicals to combat the once true but now dilapidated view you made that America is particulally free and individually empowering and progressive.
America's sole cliam to these things are as dated as Britians claim to rulling the waves, but the average american still belives them and thus thinks his systems are the best in the world. Where as the average brit would laugh if you said his nation rules the waves.
Turn off nationalism and look at the numbers FTW.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
@RyandocDO There are no facts to support your statement...none.
What WILL happen is your cushy little tax cut that Bush gave to the wealthy will be rescinded....and other little bennys the wealthy enjoy, loopholes they find for avoiding taxes will be done away with and they will be called upon to join the rest of us in fair taxation.
172677 2 years ago
One of them is American doctors. Compared to the rest of the world they scan people and biopsy far too much.
Some say they need to do this to begin a valid claim for treatment, some say American docotors are incompetent.
Whatever the reason that has to be looked into as its not resulting in suprior care by any data. Only superior costs, by up to 30% I've heard.
The perceived bad health of Americans is not as bad people think. A lot of European countries are = or worse in health.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
Alright, you're stupid, I guess I could spend all year proving that to you, but you'd be to stupid to understand. I've already said twice now Government is the problem. Let me write that in all caps so you can comprende. GOVERNMENT IS THE PROBLEM STUPID. So the solution to fix the problem of government being the problem, would be getting government out of health care. ALright? Good, bye. Please don't respond with uh "But I don't get it" Because I'm not gonna answer.
Retic92 2 years ago
I am not going to presume English is your first language so I won't be rude, but reread what I have said. Your response smacks of almost no English comprehension.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
@CmdrTobs True, that's another problem that drives up costs. We also have a massive amount of waste and fraud that drives up costs.
A86 2 years ago
@CmdrTobs American doctors scan for cancer as much as they do is because if they miss it, they will be sued and their careers will be ruined.
RyandocDO 2 years ago
go to nation master, they don't catch more cancer than many countries that scan less.
nationmaster(.)com for details
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
Option 2 is not really an option for me. As it would allow the insurance companies to behave like true capitalist enterprises. They would start adjusting premiums radically on race, location and other biometric data. Much like car insurance. I personally could not tolerate that with peoples a health. A country that would never leave a marine behind, but would leave a citizen behind because they had X,Y,Z risk factor genes and was from taxes had a poor credit score.... not good.
CmdrTobs 2 years ago
Except it is not working that way. There is PLENTY of innovation happening in Britain, Australia, Western Europe and Japan. For example, in Australia, we have created the Cochlear ear implant, spray on skin grafts for burns victims, several new vaccines, a cure for stomach ulcers, thats just off the top of my head. And if you look at the Nobel Prizewinners for Medicine over the last 20 years or so, you will find it full of Australians, Europeans and British people as well as Americans.
dangerouslytalented 2 years ago
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
Albert Einstein
Silberdachs 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Government Health care will not lower cost, how uninformed do you have to be to actually believe that. Everyone who is tired of how high there health care is now, do you realize that we will pay taxes on this for 4 years while still having to have our own coverage until the government plan is put into motion. Paying double for 4 years, only to find out that most of the money(the reason all this is being done anyways) has been siphoned off, and we once again have to sacrifice. Wake the f up
detest4321 2 years ago
bin so einsam heute wäre echt klasse falls sich jemand finden würde der mit mir schreiben will
babebiswweta 2 years ago
The Conservatives, the Republicans, the so called "Tea Baggers" and "Faux News" have been telling you this shit was going to happen for the past year and you have been calling them quacks traitors and every other thing in the book. Public or Private, RATIONING is the ONLY way they can do this thing. That is the #1 reason us "nuts" are against it. I don't know of any Republican who is for this bill, so stop blaming them. They told you so, but you didn't listen. Just fucking trash the thing.
johnscck 2 years ago
@johnscck There already is rationing with private enterprise. Even more so with this bill apparently. With a public *option* rationing criticisms become more muted.
jotunobsidianeyes 2 years ago 2
I wouldn't exactly call our current health care system "private enterprise." The degree to which government is involved is incredibly high. I would argue that the reason rationing has become necessary is because of the government involvement. All the regulation, subsidies and price controls violently distort the market and make it much more difficult to innovate and to decrease prices. Moreover, this rationing is horrendous and scary and it will lead to even less innovation and higher prices.
tynews2001 2 years ago
Deep man, real deep.
willsbanana 2 years ago
It's the American way!
willsbanana 2 years ago
Democrats.
However a cost limit is just rational if you think about it, did you people want no limit?
I mean the deficit is in shreds as it is..
willsbanana 2 years ago
TYT fans = useless idiots.
willsbanana 2 years ago
All Americans are the same, complete dumbfucks, i mean look at how you spelled they're, christ get an education.
willsbanana 2 years ago
He is an incompetent spineless naive hack.
willsbanana 2 years ago
For whoeve thumb downed me. Why?
You don't agree?
willsbanana 2 years ago
'Hey teabaggers where the fuck are you'
When they came out and protested you all called them morons, jesus you fucking hypocrite.
willsbanana 2 years ago
wow... he was pointing out the hypocrisy of their position. They were all anti-rationing when it wasn't in the bill and now that it is irrefutably in the bill they dont care.
i guess that went over your head..
petieee 2 years ago
What?
So they protested against rationing, you people called them idiots for making that claim and now that it is in the bill, you agree that it is right to blame the people who protested against it..?
I mean that is ludicrous..
willsbanana 2 years ago
sigh. still missed the point i see.
Here is a timeline.
1. No rationing in bill = teabaggers protest like crazy against rationing
2. Rationing is put into the bill but the rationing favours the ppl who organise the rallies (i.e. corporate interests).: Tea baggers don't say a word.
You dont see a problem with this? The ppl who protest are used as tools by corporate groups. IF they werent then they would protest 1000x harder then ever right now. but they wont because they arnt told to.
petieee 2 years ago
Omg your outlook is so childish, I hope you aren't an adult because this is embarrassing. The teapartiers claimed that the healthcare reform bill would result in rationing (which is obvious). They protest this, you people call them idiots. Rationing gets put in which was inevitable, you people blame the people who protested it. The protesters turned up by themselves, they weren't payed, idiots who say people are controlled by corporate interests are idiots.
willsbanana 2 years ago
tea parties claimed that a public option would lead to rationing (which it wouldnt).
then in the senate version of HC a different kind of rationing gets put in and they dont do anything. noone is blaming them for it being put in the bill. ppl are just pointing out that they only protest against what they perceive to be 'rationing' when it is against the large insurers interests. no consistency
lots of them showed up in buses organised by insurers and given pre-made signs to protest with.
petieee 2 years ago 2
Lots of them...
Show me evidence of this. That is utter bullshit.
Do you seriously think the public option would not have rationing...
Shut the fuck up.
willsbanana 2 years ago
watch?v=DLkxYDesZVM
No i dont think there would be rationing in a public option. It would be just like any other insurance product except it is run by the government. They would offer coverage for certain illnesses for a certain price. If you WANT TO then you buy it. Otherwise dont buy it. its an OPTION. noone will force you to do anything.
if that is rationing then i guess every insurance product in the history of the world is rationed.
petieee 2 years ago
Jesus, if you had read the whole fucking bill you would have known that rationing was in it. How embarrassing
willsbanana 2 years ago
so youve read the whole 3000 page bill? great!
can you tell me specifically which part talks about rationing?
petieee 2 years ago
OMFG
Americans are so stupid. Read the fucking title of this video. Epic stupidity.
willsbanana 2 years ago
i thought you were referring to one of the house bills because of the past tense used in your msg. because if you had read the bill prior to this week there would have been no rationing in it.
petieee 2 years ago
Woah wait so hold on...
What the tea party people were saying was actually right?
Ofcourse you would have to ration care, it is not possible to fund peoples health care successfully for free.
Retards
willsbanana 2 years ago
free? you do realise that a public option would have been paid for by premiums?
petieee 2 years ago
Yep, the public option could be covered by premiums (fucking idiot)
willsbanana 2 years ago
so you agree that i was right yet i am still an idiot?
makes sense...
petieee 2 years ago
If I were elected I would take the private insurance money and screw them over.
:D
geminielf7 2 years ago
For some reason ive been really worked up and disappointed by this healthcare "reform". Until i realised i live britain, and we have free healthcare.
Unlucky, america.
Fangtorn 2 years ago 3
I too live in Britain. I also feel lucky that the people in Britain overall aren't as stupid as the American public overall.
mahmooa1 2 years ago 2
I don't think that's necessarily the case, I think it's more that stupid people in the US feel that they have a valid opinion.
TomWDemarco 2 years ago 2
I live in Aus and feel the same, Americans are such morons.
willsbanana 2 years ago 2
Come on Capitalism is Rationing. If you don't have enough money you don't get want you want. You get what you can afford. I just believe it should be rationed between a patient and doctor not between another big f'd up insurance conglomerates CEO & CFO. No mandatory health insurance.
jacofall7 2 years ago 3
Your country is so pathetic. I'm so glad I'm Canadian.
aquaknot 2 years ago
i thought you said Sarah Palin was crazy for saying that there would be rationing!!!!
rationing has always been in the bill...cenk just noticed it since the public option has been dropped!
PatricksTime 2 years ago
Our government is Fascist. Not just the current administration/Congress, but all their predecessors. Corporatism combined with big socialist/imperialist government is the very definition of fascism. Industry and government colluding to run our lives and exploit us while denying us our constitutionally mandated liberties.
Like it or not, we have a one party system - THEM, the political/corporate class
There is no more us - American Citizen
So sad.....
I'll wait for the pendulum to swing back
ChampaignLibertarian 2 years ago
@ChampaignLibertarian
Libertarian huh? Why don't you move to Somalia, I loved it there.
Reqrezentin 2 years ago