The heritage foundation is a republican think tank funded to provide false information as a basis for propaganda. You fell for it, or I fell for it, you see a huge part of the problem is that the truth has also been privatized and as such, it's getting harder and harder to discern the truth, especially because it's being manipulated for profit. Also, the private system doesn't provide for everyone, it... well... fails in that respect. Capitalism is for the rich, not for everyone, hence socialism
Forget this nonsense. Google "how much does an appendectomy cost" and you find that in the US it costs about 30,000 dollars (varies from 9-30k when I looked today), In France, it costs the uninsured (i,e. non subsidized) person about 7,000 dollars (converting at current rates). An appendectomy is a farly standard procedure diagnostically and surgically, Why the difference? The US system is rigged to favor the hospital and insurance corporation. Just get rid of them and SAVE!
The fact that rich liberal Democrats like Jane Fonda were on the side of Ho Chi Minh and Saddam Hussein and Che Guevarra when those mass murdering socialists were trying to murder me and my buddies in the American Army makes it difficult to believe trusting them with my health would be a wise option. I don't go to Jonestown.
I'm retired military living just above the poverty line and paying over $300 quarterly so my wife can get treated for rheumatism. I would love it if you could arrange to take money out of George Soros and Jane Fonda's Swiss bank accounts to pay for it but I damn sure wouldn't trust either of them to manage my health care because they hate American military veterans and would likely help us die of AIDS
What we need to do is let taxpayers check off on their income tax form which political party they want to authorize to manage their money and make each political party responsible for paying off their own debts with their own tax money and spending their own taxmoney on whatever's a good investment. We pay more fighting ea other
The cost of care has to be controlled. No plan is good if costs keep going up. In Japan they have a book of costs. You are only allowed to charge what the book says. All costs are standardized. MRI in the US costs about 1200 dollars, in Japan they cost 100 dollars.
Well Medicare will not be broke when they raise the preimun cost from $96.40 to some of us to $ 70.00 to $115.00 for the year 2011-2012. Less spending in SS check. In time us senior who are on SS will not have any money to live on due to the raiseing cost of Medicare. Some one got to do something about this. I like your presentaion on the subject. Keep up the good work.
Big government sort of works in a European ethno-state contex. But I don't think people in heterogeneous America is ready to hand healthcare decisions over to people whom they perceive as different from themselves.
The system definitely needs to be fixed. But I'm convinced that there's a better way to do it, than to hand it over to bureaucrats.
The Heritage Foundation is a conservative American think tank based in Washington, D.C.
The foundation took a leading role in the conservative movement during the presidency of Ronald Reagan, whose policies drew significantly from Heritage's policy study Mandate for Leadership.
Medicare is going to become much more expensive though. Part B will skyrocket because wealthy people are opting OUT of part B. Why? Because part B is based on income and they really don't want to subsidize poor people. That leaves fewer people paying part B and that means much higher premiums for you poor and middle class folks. The rest of us opt out, pay cash for care, get a DISCOUNT when we go to the doctor and get the best care and best of all WE DON"T HAVE TO DEAL WITH MEDICARE.
I disagree with basically everything you said but I have to give credit where credit is due "We gotta fix tort reform and that is going to save America. How do I know? Because I heard it on the radio. " Genius hehe.
Love your approach and wry tongue in cheek humor while sticking to the data. I teach economics and plan to post links for my students. Also, I practice forensic economics and write occasional articles on health care and related topics for our regional legal newspapers. I have included some of your videos in my Health Care Economics playlist. Keep up the good work. --John
@kazooga1234 The Grayson amendment will not work. The people would be buying into Medicare for a set low amount, but the recipient would be receiving services worth far more than what they paid in. Thus Medicare would see an even greater expansion of its already bloated liabilities. Finally when insurance companies have a monopoly on a state then they aren't much better than the government and will simply raise costs. The market system will work, but only when its been given a chance.
yes it will it is like single payer except people get to choose to use it It is a public option and i would deff pay for it it will also make insurance companys lower their price That is the main goal to make it so insurance companys stop dropping people and lower the prices and the thing is they wont beable to take from medicare or medicade anymore
@EVOB88 continue caz the insurance companys would keep the public option in check and the public option would keep the insurance companys in check what i mean by that is the public option will cost less but if it doesnt work like it supposed to then people will go to the more expensive inusrance company and withdraw from the po all together and the insurance companys have to lower the rates caz if they dont every1 would use the po and it will work better then u think
@EVOB88 Why not just switch to a system like that used in every other developed country, that spends half as much per capita than us and has healthier citizens? That seems like it makes a lot more sense than the risk of leaving health insurance to the free market (which is a pretty bad idea when you consider how demand for health care is extremely inelastic and competition is inherently low due to very high barriers to entry inherent to the industry).
@BenkaiDebussy While I respect your opinion, what you are proposing I don't believe to be moral nor efficient. First is the question of ethics. Is it really right for one group (the wealthy) to pay for this country's medical bills? What ever happened to the idea of self reliance? Second. if a socialized system is implemented then the prices for virtually everything will also rise to meet the increase in taxes and so forth.
lol, "self reliance". Quick tip: Nobody is self reliant. We depend on our interaction with other humans to develop language, to receive ideas, to acquire the basic tools of logic that have been hard won over ages of effort. When somebody says "I'm self reliant", I hear "I'm a jackass with no concept of how deeply I'm indebted to the social society I belong to. Even this fucking sentence and expression is owed to other humans".
@BenkaiDebussy Finally you claim that these government systems are so efficient, yet this is quite to the contrary. All government run entitlements are inefficient by their very nature, there isn't one entitlement program run by any government which can hold a candle to capitalism's productive power. Our current U.S system is mixed with the majority of care provided by the government and the little bit of the system which is "free market" is regulated very heavily, both reasons why cost ishigh
What are your thoughts on John Stossels recent episode on healthcare reform? He destroys all arguments in favor of single payer socialism. I'd like to see your reply. (Doubt you have an answer)
No, I didn't see that one video that one time that that one guy on that one show made. And no, I am not prepared to give an entire point-by-point response to "that guy is right." Could you be bothered to actually name a specific fact rather than cite the vague claims of the guy citing the vague claims of the other guy citing the vague claims of the other guy?
A Newish, This is not a Health Care Bill. This is a scam to take money from the people so the Politicians will line thier pockets and the special interest groups that keep these whores in office. We have the best Gov't money can buy. I don't listen to the radio, I pay the bills. We don't know how to do this correctly. If they want real Health Care, they'll pick up the phone call the Health Minister in France or Germany and ask how to do it. Not here everybody gets their cut.
Health cost in the US (15.3% of GDP) cost more because theres a billion regulation that make it expensive as hell.
Health care cost in Hong Kong (4.0% of GDP) Health care is cheap because theys no regulation nor government interferiance. Pure free market health care.
Congratulations, you just won the "I'm too gullible to do ten seconds of research before parroting something I heard on the radio" award for today.
From the very first line of Wikipedia's article one HK healthcare: "Hong Kong's medical infrastructure consists of a mixed medical economy, with 12 private hospitals and more than 50 public hospitals"
HK is yet another great example of how public healtcare offers better service at a much lower price. Thank you for proving my point.
well obama care doesnt exist there isnt anything called obama care and i guess u now found out that there isnt a public option so far that if "health care" passes it will be more money to the insurance companys more people go bankrupted unless we have a public option and it seems that what we call a public option if we get one will be medicare buy in only for people who want it it wont affect any1 who wants nothing to do with it
I sympathize with you. I make comments on youtube and will throw in websites, or sources and never do I get sources given back to me. Just a bunch of rubbish comments that are so opinionated that it drives any common sensed person crazy. My wife thinks I am crazy for wasting my free time talking to closed minded people, but I still want to believe that in this wonderful country, people listen to reason... well some do, just not those whom reply to me. Your the man, and your sources are right.
@simontimon2 Yeah, and that is exactly why certain industries, like health care insurance, should be socialized. The government is necessary for certain things.
@simontimon2 That isn't what socialized means. Socialized means that the government owns and controls a given industry. Also, you still get billed for going to the ER, and those who can't pay the bills not only get their credit ruined, but it increases the costs for those who can.
The situation would benefit in almost every way if we had legitimate single-payer health insurance.
@simontimon2 Do you realize that every other country with UHC/socialized health care pays at MOST half of what we do per capita on health care? If we implement UHC in the same way other countries have, we will end up spending far, far less than we do with our current system. Taxes do go up, but they go up far less than people are paying right now in insurnace premiums. This makes sense; insurance costs go down when you have more people in your risk pool.
Medicare works really well , Humana is run much worse . It is sad that people think universal health care would cost us too much , when the truth is 50% of your taxes go to the military alone . The f-22 Raptor doesn't work and has never been used in combat , the Pentagon said we should never build another one , so we are building 150 more at 200 million dollars a piece !
Based off this years budget, the military is roughly 15% of the federal budget. Entitlement spending already accounds for most of our taxes. You shouldn't just make stuff up on the fly.
Yea , except that I got my info directly off the whitehouse website . 15% is hillarious . It has never been that low in our nation's history . Next year's budget is 587 billion for the Department of Defense , then you have the Department of Veterans Affairs and also several programs fall under Health and Human services , especially checks sent to veterans widows and counseling rehabing veterans outside of the V A hospitals . Total cost of the military in 2010 about 675 Billion .
The total federal budget was 3.1 trillion dollars. I know thats a lot of numbers to punch into a calculator but defence spending is still around 20% of the federal budget. And that still excludes emergency legislation such as the stimulus and tarp bills. I stand by my original statement. Social security was projected to cost 644 billion this year. But atleast you got to laugh before reality set in.
The federal budget for 2010 is under 2 trillion dollars and Social Security is only 11.6 billion . Its OK you were only off by 630 billion dollars or so . Social Security is one sixtieth that's right 1 60th of the Department of Defense . Look it up , it is easily available. If you still stand by your statement then you cannot read or you are making things up off the top of your head .
Thats not true... u can go right back to wiki and see spending break downs with Defense getting 21% 56% if you include mandatory spending not SS or MM or the wars we are in which will be counted btw for the time under this admin SS and MM are 44% so entitlements dont count for half. its high but if you cut dum wars no bid contracts that dont benefit the tax payer and for profit health care you can cut cost significantly
NON-profit medicare costs way more than for profit healthcare. Medicare fraud is estimated to be as high as 60 billion a year. And the lack of medical innovation around the world means the US is the single greatest hope for finding better treatments and cures for diseases that affect every person on the planet. Profit brings out the motivation in people. But if you wish to do it for free then I won't stop you!
Please provide stats to back up your statement that non-profit medicare costs are "way more" than for-profit healthcare.
Also, since you have provided only 60 billion as the fraud that is committed on Medicare, could you kindly provide the statistic for the dollar value of fraud that is committed each year against private health insurers. (It is meaningless to provide one figure without the other.)
he was being sarcastic about the medicare being more then insurance companys and he was also being sarcastic about a lot of other things he wasnt being serious he was saying that medicare and medicade work and ya there r prob some fraud but there would be less of it if people could buy into medicare
dude i love u for posting this so much i mention something bout medicare and then some moron said a bunch of lies and i just said i can prove it and sent them this link and that shut them right up
yeah, porn is a requisite consumable here, the department of social security actually check to make sure you've searched and reviewed at least 4 porn vids b4 they'll give you a payment!
Hang on sir...I'm totally for medicare. I 100% agree that all the bad news surrounding national healthcare is based on the private sector pumping Fox news with scarey fake data. Read what I said again please. I was referring to your tort reform comment.
Heh, that's ok. Hey, if you want to talk to someone that has first hand experience with national health, talk to me. I grew up in the USA and lived there till 25. I moved to Australia where we have medicare for everyone. There are more benefits to national health other than the financial ones. Been here for 9 years and have no intention of going back.
I've heard the exact same thing from every expat I talk to - England, France, Australia all have better healthcare. Well, enjoy the good service down under, mate.
So the only way to fix the system is to give a free pass to incompitent Dr's? That might work with economics but it's not an actual solution. However, most of your points are tongue in cheek so I'm not really sure if you were being serious in that part of your video.
Your gist of big govt run healthcare never works is a load of hypothetical bullshit. If you step out into the real world, not too far, just North across the border, what you will see is a big govt working. Oh, what's that - they pay more taxes? Alright, but their coverage is not dropped and they don't go bankrupt (even if they earn above average)...too many to list...you dumb fuck
Why waste so much energy on being sarcastic and not getting to the root of the problem? Are you just in this because you enjoy making people look bad or do you have a desire to get to the root of the problem. Once you finally see the root of the problem, do you have enough virtue to accept the problem and really work for a solution?
Medicine good=people live longer.
Abortion bad=fewer people to support those who are living longer. No system will work until we fix the REAL problem.
The only problem is that we also have an overpopulation problem on this planet which is quickly heading us towards an energy crisis which will finish off all of our fuel, leaving us helpless (since we haven't been developing alternative sources of energy quickly enough) to transport food and service across the country and the world. And if we did make abortion illegal, women would do it anyways, only in much less safe ways to their health (i.e. rusty coat hangers). That's a disturbing truth.
You have no substantial evidence to prove that we are overpopulated, rather there is overwhelming evidence that overpopulation is a myth. Please check out the youtube video "Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth". Even if we are so "overpopulated" does that give those humans who are born the right to exterminate the humans who have not been born? The impartial U.S. economy says no. Our economy is collapsing because of it. More people are drawing benefits than there are people to contribute.
Go take a look in the dumpster of a restaurant. Or a grocery store. We do not have a food shortage and when we listen to overly emotional environmentalists who don't employ reason when spouting off at the mouth, we do things like use all of our corn production to try and produce efficient fuel. This takes food away from live stock and drives up the cost of raising livestock. Everything that uses corn syrup becomes more expensive to produce.
And the most disturbing effect on the environment that the overpopulation myth has advanced is the estrogen in our water system. Do a youtube search for "estrogen in the water". The contraceptive pill has tainted our water system and the problem is so bad that fish are being mutated. Not being a doctor, I can only speculate that estrogen poisoning is the main cause for ED which appears to be an epidemic in the U.S. if you watch commercials on TV.
And then to say the "women would do it anyways" is completely unfounded. The mentally unhealthy women might attempt it but there are 3,000 abortions per day and the number of women joining "Silent No More", women who have had abortions and who deeply regret it and many of them who reveal the truth that they were coerced into getting an abortion either by their parents or boyfriend, husband, or even their doctor, those women would be having children.
Fertility and Pregnancy are natural. Those who think that it is ok to chemically compromise a woman's natural fertility are doing something gravely wrong. The pill harms a woman's endocrine system. You take a pill because you are sick, not because your body is working properly. The inconvenient truth for you seanotube is that more women have died from legalized abortion than who died from back alley abortions. And the harm that legalizing abortion has done to society is revealed in our economy.
Woah, woah, woah, since when does something have to be a function of a system to be 'natural'? You made the claim that 'fertility and pregnancy are natural', as if that had some sort of normative significance. Now you're moving the goal posts and saying that something has to be a function of a system. Make up your mind.
But for the record, cancer is a function of mutations in the genes of somatic cells. Not a 'system', granted, but still a function, and still natural.
Nothing's being moved, you're just not thinking your erroneous logic through.
It doesn't take a genius to observe the biological fact that the human reproductive system has the specific purpose of generating other members of the species homo sapiens.
The natural function of the female and male reproductive system is to produce a gamete. The haploid is produced for the purpose of mixing with it's complement and generating a human. But might I add that you started this tangent.
And the nose has the specific function of holding up our spectacles. There is no such thing as 'purpose' in nature, and scientists gave up on such teleological thinking in the 1600. There are laws, there are processes, but there haven't been any purposes since we threw out Aristotle.
Contraception treats a natural function of the human reproductive system as if it is a disease or a dysfunction. You have used the example of cancer. Fertility means that a woman's reproductive system is working properly. It is working according to its natural function. It is natural. You take a pill for a headache or to treat something that IS NOT working properly in an attempt to return the body back to a healthy state. But in reality, the pill brakes a woman's body.
So what do you think of someone who takes an immunosuppressant drugs to ensure that their body doesn't reject a transplanted heart? Such drugs interfere with the natural functioning of a bodily system. Do you think that's immoral or wrong? Would you rather such a person dies?
So I take it you are just going to jump from one thing to the next and avoid the "Economics of Medicare" discussion. I would hope that an intelligent person would realize that the taking of immunosuppressants for the purpose of replacing a failing body part falls within the same bounds as taking poisonous chemo to stop cancer.
Please stop being a punk. You've jumped 3 topics now. Since life is dynamic, I'm sure you won't soon exhaust tangents. How about back to Medicare then? Stay on topic.
I've never engaged in the Medicare discussion with you. I picked up a comment you made about contraception and we ran with it.
And I'm not 'jumping topics'; I'm simply exploring the logical implications of your position. You've said that 'interfering with a natural function of a human system' is somehow wrong. If you sincerely believe that, they you are committed to a number of absurd positions (such as rejecting immunosuppressants. You don't want to accept this conclusion, but it follows.
You should not engage in a reductio ad absurdum unless you understand the dynamics of the topic you are discussing. You are not using this technique like a philosopher but more as a politician or rather a neo atheist who enjoys pseudo intellectual gymnastics.
"But it follows." no it doesn't, non sequitur. In one case the body is not functioning properly and so you have to suppress the immune system to allow a transplant. In the case of contraception, you medicate a healthy function.
The statement 'it is immoral to interfere with the natural functioning of a human bodily system' is a general rule, but one that has exceptions, such as when it is necessary to restore or maintain the functioning of another system.
So naturally you think taking birth control pills are okay, since they help prevent cancer, cystic fibroadenomas & pelvic infection, and hence qualify for the exception to your rule, right?
Yes sisyphus, you are still jumping because you are jumping to absurdities before you have laid down a rational point of departure. You could say something like. "It's ok to take a pill that causes a woman's body to think it is pregnant thus subverting the process of ovulation because a woman has a fundamental right to a robust sex life if she so chooses". But you haven't stated anything like that. You're just being a punk who isn't standing on any ground. You're just jumping.
I'm trying to explore the logical implications of your argument. If you think that makes me a 'punk' then so be it. All I care about is if your position is a sensible and coherent one. If my understanding of your position is incorrect then please, correct me. Calling me names really gets you nowhere, and just makes it look like you're afraid to consider objections.
"I picked up on a comment you made about contraception"
The comment was about how contraception and abortion have ruined our economy. Now there are fewer people entering the work force than there are retiring and drawing benefits. So you started off by jumping topic and then each subsequent comment you posted was a further jump. It's a common pattern in pseudo intellectual atheists.
Chemo - immunosuppressants are not of the same discussion. They promote health and contraception subverts health.
In point of fact, contraception & abortion have helped the economy. Unwanted babies are much more likely grow up to be criminals. This is why there was a massive drop in the crime rate just about 16 years after Roe V. Wade.
We have more than enough people in the work force, way more than we need, in fact. Our population is unsustainably large, given our current rates of consumption.
And my atheism has nothing to do with this conversation. Please, let's leave the ad hominems out of this.
Since you don't want to talk about why Medicare is going bankrupt, maybe you would like to take this discussion to a private corrispondance or maybe comment on a Kresta video that deals with the things you are talking about.
Because as it is, you are just being a punk. Medicare is going bankrupt right now. It is because we have contracepted and aborted our population to an unsustainable degree. Atheists should get off their religious high horse and start looking at the facts.
Our population has increased by 50% over the last 40 years. Contraception has been legal that whole time, and abortion legal nationally for 33 of those years. 50% in 40 years is a remarkable, and unsustainable rate of growth. It is also way more than is needed to replace and support retirees.
You quite literally could not be more wrong. Not only has abortion and contraception not adversely hindered population growth, it has helped the economy. We need fewer, not more people on this planet.
Medicare is an efficient system, so why is it going bankrupt. Medicare only has a 2% overhead. It should not be going bankrupt. What is the problem then? The problem is that there are more people drawing benefits than there are people contributing benefits.
Advancements in medicine have caused people to live longer. Abortion and contraception have caused fewer people to be born. The baby boom generation is retiring now and living longer. You can't have a system where 1 contributes and 5 take.
The fact is, Medicare is bankrupt because we have contracepted and aborted the future of medicare. When medicare was started we were a population that replaced itself. Medicare worked. You could spread the financial burden across a large number of shoulders and the burden was not so great to be unjust. That is what insurance is. People contribute so as to be covered in time of need. The more people contribute the less the individual has to pay in order to sustain the system. No people no system.
you are aware the population is exploding, right? Are you also saying there are 5 people over 65 on Medicare for every 1 person not on it? Cuz thats ridiculous.
Beginning in 2011, the first of 78 million baby boomers (people born between 1946 and 1964) will start the transition to retirement, kicking off an expansion in the number of elderly people that will continue for decades. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, one out of every nine baby boomers will live to be at least age 90.
Cancer is not natural to the human body. That is why you treat it. If left untreated the result is death of the human. A person goes on chemo because they are trying to fix a dysfunction in their body. Wouldn't you agree that fixing a dysfunction is a different act than trying to chemically frustrate a natural function? To put it yet another way, the purpose of reproductive anatomy is to produce the material needed to generate human life. Ovaries make eggs.
Of course cancer is natural--it happens in all mammals, and many non-mammalian species. It is part of nature. What else could you mean? Surely you don't think that cancer is SUPERnatural, do you? Nor do you think it's artificial, like plastic. So what else could it be, other than natural?
You seem to be conflating 'natural' with 'desirable.' That is foolish for many reasons, not the least of which is the fact that cancer, lupus, cholera, etc. are all natural.
Are you seriously arguing against birth control? Wow. Let me just say this. There are women out there who take Birth Control because their cycles are so irregular, infertility could occur. Are you saying were should get rid of conctraceptives? Tell that to Africans who are dying daily due to an HIV/AIDS epidemic.
I am saying that Medicare is unsustainable because we have contracepted and aborted the people who were supposed to be here to replace those who would retire. We have unnaturally changed our nation's demographic and our economy is finally showing us that. We have made advancements in medicine which has the good result of causing people to live longer. Are you seriously saying that contraception and abortion have not reduced the number of people?
And now an off topic response. Are you seriously saying that the only way to treat irregular cycles is to take the pill? You are wrong. Talk to an OBGYN about your error.
Are you saying that the pill fights HIV/AIDS? I just don't have an answer for that but I think I'm taking you out of context so why don't you just stay on the topic of Medicare then. Oh wait, you never addressed it, you just have an emotional attachment to a bad sex product.
When did I say it's the only way?Nonetheless, it is an EFFECTIVE way to treat irregular cycles. And the pill doesn't fight HIV/AIDS. I never meant to imply that. You seem to have a disgust for contraceptives in general. I was referring to condoms, another contraceptive which do help prevent HIV.
I'm curious though. How would you prevent abortions without contraceptives? Like it or not, the only way to lower the number of abortions is to reduce unwanted pregnancies.
That's one of the same arguments that Dr. Bernard Nathanson advanced when he founded NARAL. Dr. Nathanson is now a pro life speaker. And so is Norma McCorvey who was Jane Roe in Roe v. Wade. So the founder of NARAL and the defendant in the landmark abortion case are both now bro life. That alone speaks volumes but your theory that contraceptives reduce abortion, how about you look up the statistics on that. You are incredibly wrong.
Contraception gives people a false license to have more sex with more people. Do you know where babies come from?
What has also happened is the spread of STDs because people indoctrinate kids into thinking that condoms = safe sex. This is false. Condoms don't protect against HPV and now HPV is the largest STD in the world and growing. And AIDS is still a thriving STD. Why? Because you don't employ a device that enables promiscuity and get the effect of reducing sexually transmitted diseases.
so, why not use a public health care system to treat the people with the STD... you know, attack the problem at the source?
Oh, that's right... people keep telling me that Americans don't want to vote for Public Health... they'd rather head over to Africa to have sex with starving children who have to eat monkeys to survive!
Don't you realize that a Federalize Public Option is unsustainable because there are more people retiring and drawing benefits than there are people being born and entering into the work force and contributing to the benefits? That is why Medicare, Social Security, The Post office ($5.6 billion in retired health benefits), The Housing Market, and current insurance plans are all tanking. We have contracepted and aborted our economic future.
Are you under the illusion that a town can't curb STDs without the help of the Federal Government? In a small town you have numbers that are actually addressable by us citizens. It is when the Fed throws national numbers and world numbers at people, that people loose confidence in their ability to take care of themselves. If people start taking care of their community and respecting natural law, the problem will be fixed.
natural law says people want to have sex. at least to men with balls and women with ovaries.
If a person has access to health care, they are more likely to be healthy and, if they contract an STD, more likely to not only have themselves checked, but to refer the other party to a *FREE* doctor!!!
We have made advancements in medicine, and those advancements cause people to live longer. So we have a greater number of people retiring from the work force and living longer.
Abortion and contraception have unnaturally reduced the number of people entering the work force. Some of us are smart enough to realize that if you have a system where 5 people are waiting for a resource and there is only 1 person contributing a resource, you have a doomed system, rationing, fights.
So are you going to explain why Obama says that medicare is going bankrupt? youtube search "Obama's Medicare Flip Flop"
So while you are spending your time making a video that you think is clever, all you have done is to illustrate that the government program is a better program BUT STILL GOING BANKRUPT. Well run programs shouldn't tank. Why is this happening? It is because abortion and contraception have reduced the number of people entering the work force. More people take than contribute.
Well that's a nice vague statement which has no substance to build upon and is the same kind of character attack that I expected.
Medicare has only a 2% overhead. A system with so little overhead should not be failing. And if it isn't failing then our President should not be saying it is.
The reason why it is failing is because of the unnatural reduction of people (from contraception and abortion) who will, now, not contribute to the resources needed to keep the system going.
yes, Kresta, you should definitely go to India or Africa, where everyone has lots of kids, all those countries where the average population is below 25 years old... they definitely have a strong workforce that could support your communist ideals... and I'm sure they'd love to have you as a citizen: much more than we would, at least :p
Didn't John Paul 2, Lech Wałęsa, and Ronald Reagan destroy communism? Why would we want it back. Isn't that why this whole debate is taking place?
Pope Benedict has time and time again pointed out that 3rd world countries have been able to get out of the 3rd wold because they have the population to do so. So that means that the contraception plans that the UN would like to have imposed would have hindered the development of these countries.
We've got enough to deal with right now with the health care debate. No need to walk down the path of a non sequitur. A public option is unsustainable due to the unnatural demographic shift that contraception and abortion has caused in our country. There are more people retiring than there are people entering the work force. There are more people drawing benefits than there are contributing. Not only would a federalized system be doomed, the system we have now is tanking.
Communism also fell because of the inefficiency of centralization. Russia lost 1/3 of their grain production because they centralized its distribution. So let's say I'm a farmer. I have to put the grain that I produce on a train. That train goes to a federal centralized point and then gets rationed and sent back out around Russia and to me, the one who grew it.
Oh, and ask Hu Jintao about third world population.
And ask Nigeria if it's population they need, or a fair price for oil and a stable political system.
you greatly oversimplify your hack-like rhetoric to return to the same obsolete point regarding contraception. Ask Hu Jintao how China's going to compete with the US: population growth (NO) or industrialisation (yes).
fight the facts, krestaTheSophist.
by quoting Joseph Alois Ratzinger, and Reagan, you've revealed your bias.
Or maybe we can focus on the problem in the United States. This is the problem with socialism. People pretend that they know what is going on in other countries and ignore the problems in their own back yard. The U.S. Federal government throws out unmanageable national statistics on health care and overwhelms the citizen who can contribute to a solution for the manageable problems in their own state.
USA has the problem. Socialism functions perfectly well for the rest of the world. Sure, I can't speak from personal experience at having died after being refused healthcare @ a US hospital, but I can definitely tell all you yanks that it's damn nice to be able to access healthcare when I need it. :) hehehe, suckers! but, really, it's ppl like kresta u need to confront with the truth of the economics if u wanna access healthcare.
Contraception and Abortion have killed the sustainability of the U.S. economy. We have built an infrastructure that demands people be a part of it. That is why social security and Medicare worked when it was started. But now everything is falling apart due to the extermination of the people who were supposed to be here.
yep...300,000,000 and counting... just let me know how many people u want ontop of, and underneath you when you don't have a backyard to throw a ball for the dog.
you want what, 1.5billion? good luck! why not just invite the Mexicans to join you there, that'll make it nice & cozy!
How about you take a look at the number of people who will be retiring in 2011. The baby boom generation will be retiring. And the baby doom generation is not prepared to face the future in the light of reality.
yep. Definitely, an entire generation of people who have paid their taxes their whole lives, and what would be the decent thing that could be done for them?
what would Jesus do for someone who had paid him a goodly percentage of their life's hard-gotten gains? Would Jesus turn them away at the hospital door? Or would Jesus be tearing up the health insurance company's balance sheets shouting "there'll be no usury here!"?
Sorry, but I can't account for your past governments' poor choices.
You talk like there is some kind of magic way to recover from all of the people that the U.S. has Aborted. Universal health care is something that the U.S. Catholic Bishops have been pressing for 15 years now. But the buck stops where coverage for abortion and contraception starts. It is also clear that the private sector is the proper place to build such a mechanism. The government's job is to curtail abuses. All you are doing is preaching to a stereotype, try having a conversation.
So explain why Medicare, Social Security, The housing market, and others are collapsing. If you want to stand with your head in the sand then have fun but others who understand facts and demographics are actually working for a solution. You seem insistent on contributing hate. Why? Do you want the problem to get worse?
mate, that's your problem. You're the yank, use your own think tank. All I can do is tell you that the system works for the rest of us. If you guys over there on the flipside can't figure out how to run your own economy effectively, that's your bad luck.
Here, they are NOT collapsing. I can tell you that. While we're at it; how much profit does the military make?
In about an hour, we are going to be talking Live on the Kresta in the Afternoon Blog. The topic will be President Obama's last night about health care reform.
We talk with Bishop Samuel Aquila of Fargo, N.D., Leonard Nelson, author of Diagnosis Critical, Kristen Day of Democrats for Life, Douglas Johnson of National Right to Life, and Kevin Schmeising of the Acton Institute.
I particularly liked the nod to the remark about poor Dr Hawkings had he been a UK citizen. Thank the Red White and Blue that he was a US citizen and didn't get aborted by some care rationing socialist system like they have in Britain.
What ever would he have done without American care....... idiots. The speech software has an american accent..... he must be american.
Nice Job well done Newish. To those who oppose reform and te Public Option or A Single Payer like Medicare I say this, You will get old one day also (if your lucky) and when you do do you hope someone will care for you and help you or do you put all of your FAITH in the Almighty Capitalist System that is causing us all to PAY more and More for getting sick ?
Oh, I certainly do get to just walk away from that... your arguments are not even worth addressing due to the obvious logical fallacies they're based on, so... good day.
Where we should start on health care reform is to allow people to buy insurance where they please and pass loser pays tort reform (like Europe has! Yah!).
Most other government reform at the federal level would be unconstitutional. Read Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. The Congress is not permitted to regulate or sell health insurance. If you want socialized, go do it on a state level. California is a great place to start.....
"Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; "
Ask a legal scholar. Go research the founding of this country. Look what President James Madison, the father of the Constitution, had to say about these words. If you open up the floodgates of by allowing government to intervene into the economy (which was generally unconstitutional for the majority of our history), then those words have no meaning. We already have tons of unconstitutional government, it would only be more of a disgrace to continue down this road.
I'm strongly against the current statist reform, but am not an anti-reformer.
Regardless of your political persuasion, the only way Medicare can possibly remain funded is by sharply cutting benefits and sharply increasing payroll taxes. Medicare gives you all the benefits of single payer socialist health care, but none of the downturns. This is why it is going bankrupt. Canada or England's socialized health care is not going bankrupt because they pay high taxes and ration care to high heaven.
The heritage foundation is a republican think tank funded to provide false information as a basis for propaganda. You fell for it, or I fell for it, you see a huge part of the problem is that the truth has also been privatized and as such, it's getting harder and harder to discern the truth, especially because it's being manipulated for profit. Also, the private system doesn't provide for everyone, it... well... fails in that respect. Capitalism is for the rich, not for everyone, hence socialism
punkwasher 6 months ago
correction to my last comment. The cost range I saw was $9-89k
hauskalainen 6 months ago
Forget this nonsense. Google "how much does an appendectomy cost" and you find that in the US it costs about 30,000 dollars (varies from 9-30k when I looked today), In France, it costs the uninsured (i,e. non subsidized) person about 7,000 dollars (converting at current rates). An appendectomy is a farly standard procedure diagnostically and surgically, Why the difference? The US system is rigged to favor the hospital and insurance corporation. Just get rid of them and SAVE!
hauskalainen 6 months ago
The fact that rich liberal Democrats like Jane Fonda were on the side of Ho Chi Minh and Saddam Hussein and Che Guevarra when those mass murdering socialists were trying to murder me and my buddies in the American Army makes it difficult to believe trusting them with my health would be a wise option. I don't go to Jonestown.
Texasjim2007 8 months ago
I'm retired military living just above the poverty line and paying over $300 quarterly so my wife can get treated for rheumatism. I would love it if you could arrange to take money out of George Soros and Jane Fonda's Swiss bank accounts to pay for it but I damn sure wouldn't trust either of them to manage my health care because they hate American military veterans and would likely help us die of AIDS
Texasjim2007 8 months ago
What we need to do is let taxpayers check off on their income tax form which political party they want to authorize to manage their money and make each political party responsible for paying off their own debts with their own tax money and spending their own taxmoney on whatever's a good investment. We pay more fighting ea other
Texasjim2007 8 months ago
The cost of care has to be controlled. No plan is good if costs keep going up. In Japan they have a book of costs. You are only allowed to charge what the book says. All costs are standardized. MRI in the US costs about 1200 dollars, in Japan they cost 100 dollars.
Spytheweb 9 months ago
Well Medicare will not be broke when they raise the preimun cost from $96.40 to some of us to $ 70.00 to $115.00 for the year 2011-2012. Less spending in SS check. In time us senior who are on SS will not have any money to live on due to the raiseing cost of Medicare. Some one got to do something about this. I like your presentaion on the subject. Keep up the good work.
EEWOOD43 10 months ago
Big government sort of works in a European ethno-state contex. But I don't think people in heterogeneous America is ready to hand healthcare decisions over to people whom they perceive as different from themselves.
The system definitely needs to be fixed. But I'm convinced that there's a better way to do it, than to hand it over to bureaucrats.
LibertaerUeberAlles 10 months ago
I have a funny feeling that conservatives take this seriously and nod at everything that was said.
Basta11 1 year ago
The Heritage Foundation is a conservative American think tank based in Washington, D.C.
The foundation took a leading role in the conservative movement during the presidency of Ronald Reagan, whose policies drew significantly from Heritage's policy study Mandate for Leadership.
Basta11 1 year ago
i love your satire
ironmantis25 1 year ago
Health insurance isn't a free market.
check out John Stossel video on insurance.
Thetruthishere11 1 year ago
@Thetruthishere11
Credit Default Swaps were unregulated insurance.
They were also the major cause of the economic collapse we just had.
greyflcn 1 year ago
Wow why is this video even up if the channel is unavailable? Do I smell private interests?
GodlessInfinity 1 year ago
Oh well if it's on New Majority dot com.... Yeah... It costs $10,000 a year to keep an old person alive! THAT'S YOUR MONEY CITIZEN!
GodlessInfinity 1 year ago
Medicare is going to become much more expensive though. Part B will skyrocket because wealthy people are opting OUT of part B. Why? Because part B is based on income and they really don't want to subsidize poor people. That leaves fewer people paying part B and that means much higher premiums for you poor and middle class folks. The rest of us opt out, pay cash for care, get a DISCOUNT when we go to the doctor and get the best care and best of all WE DON"T HAVE TO DEAL WITH MEDICARE.
dkw12002 1 year ago
Comment removed
dstebbin 1 year ago
I disagree with basically everything you said but I have to give credit where credit is due "We gotta fix tort reform and that is going to save America. How do I know? Because I heard it on the radio. " Genius hehe.
safewaysecurity 1 year ago
Love your approach and wry tongue in cheek humor while sticking to the data. I teach economics and plan to post links for my students. Also, I practice forensic economics and write occasional articles on health care and related topics for our regional legal newspapers. I have included some of your videos in my Health Care Economics playlist. Keep up the good work. --John
saseassociates 1 year ago
i hope we get medicare buy in that would be so ha bisky its deffinately needed
kazooga1234 1 year ago
@kazooga1234 The Grayson amendment will not work. The people would be buying into Medicare for a set low amount, but the recipient would be receiving services worth far more than what they paid in. Thus Medicare would see an even greater expansion of its already bloated liabilities. Finally when insurance companies have a monopoly on a state then they aren't much better than the government and will simply raise costs. The market system will work, but only when its been given a chance.
EVOB88 1 year ago
yes it will it is like single payer except people get to choose to use it It is a public option and i would deff pay for it it will also make insurance companys lower their price That is the main goal to make it so insurance companys stop dropping people and lower the prices and the thing is they wont beable to take from medicare or medicade anymore
kazooga1234 1 year ago
@EVOB88 continue caz the insurance companys would keep the public option in check and the public option would keep the insurance companys in check what i mean by that is the public option will cost less but if it doesnt work like it supposed to then people will go to the more expensive inusrance company and withdraw from the po all together and the insurance companys have to lower the rates caz if they dont every1 would use the po and it will work better then u think
kazooga1234 1 year ago
@EVOB88 Why not just switch to a system like that used in every other developed country, that spends half as much per capita than us and has healthier citizens? That seems like it makes a lot more sense than the risk of leaving health insurance to the free market (which is a pretty bad idea when you consider how demand for health care is extremely inelastic and competition is inherently low due to very high barriers to entry inherent to the industry).
BenkaiDebussy 1 year ago
@BenkaiDebussy While I respect your opinion, what you are proposing I don't believe to be moral nor efficient. First is the question of ethics. Is it really right for one group (the wealthy) to pay for this country's medical bills? What ever happened to the idea of self reliance? Second. if a socialized system is implemented then the prices for virtually everything will also rise to meet the increase in taxes and so forth.
EVOB88 1 year ago
lol, "self reliance". Quick tip: Nobody is self reliant. We depend on our interaction with other humans to develop language, to receive ideas, to acquire the basic tools of logic that have been hard won over ages of effort. When somebody says "I'm self reliant", I hear "I'm a jackass with no concept of how deeply I'm indebted to the social society I belong to. Even this fucking sentence and expression is owed to other humans".
NoAntecessor 1 year ago
@NoAntecessor Agreed. I have yet to meet the person who completely supplies his own food and water and air.
Newsish 1 year ago
@BenkaiDebussy Finally you claim that these government systems are so efficient, yet this is quite to the contrary. All government run entitlements are inefficient by their very nature, there isn't one entitlement program run by any government which can hold a candle to capitalism's productive power. Our current U.S system is mixed with the majority of care provided by the government and the little bit of the system which is "free market" is regulated very heavily, both reasons why cost ishigh
EVOB88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
heyy i garantee i can make you wonder about somthing very interesting
SEARCh "ELMOVANS"
youll will never think the same !!!
elmovans 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
heyy i garantee i can make you wonder about somthing very interesting
youll will never think the same !!!
elmovans 1 year ago
Comment removed
gunsandbullhorns 2 years ago
newsish,
What are your thoughts on John Stossels recent episode on healthcare reform? He destroys all arguments in favor of single payer socialism. I'd like to see your reply. (Doubt you have an answer)
TimeWarp66 2 years ago
No, I didn't see that one video that one time that that one guy on that one show made. And no, I am not prepared to give an entire point-by-point response to "that guy is right." Could you be bothered to actually name a specific fact rather than cite the vague claims of the guy citing the vague claims of the other guy citing the vague claims of the other guy?
Newsish 2 years ago
What other guy, other guy, other guy? Just John Stossel. Lol. Here's the link for the vid:
watch?v=D4ndu_y2yLQ&feature=related
In all seriousness I'd like to know your thoughts on the points he makes. Tell me where he gets it wrong. It's only a 5 min. clip.
TimeWarp66 2 years ago
@Newsish youtube . com/watch?v=pAggFrvih60
Thetruthishere11 1 year ago
A Newish, This is not a Health Care Bill. This is a scam to take money from the people so the Politicians will line thier pockets and the special interest groups that keep these whores in office. We have the best Gov't money can buy. I don't listen to the radio, I pay the bills. We don't know how to do this correctly. If they want real Health Care, they'll pick up the phone call the Health Minister in France or Germany and ask how to do it. Not here everybody gets their cut.
zinnington 2 years ago
Health cost in the US (15.3% of GDP) cost more because theres a billion regulation that make it expensive as hell.
Health care cost in Hong Kong (4.0% of GDP) Health care is cheap because theys no regulation nor government interferiance. Pure free market health care.
simontimon2 2 years ago
Congratulations, you just won the "I'm too gullible to do ten seconds of research before parroting something I heard on the radio" award for today.
From the very first line of Wikipedia's article one HK healthcare: "Hong Kong's medical infrastructure consists of a mixed medical economy, with 12 private hospitals and more than 50 public hospitals"
HK is yet another great example of how public healtcare offers better service at a much lower price. Thank you for proving my point.
Newsish 2 years ago
First public healthcare in Hong Kong is run by local government, but most of the health care is run privatly.
Second obamacare is ferderaly run
theres a big difference between how efficient it is
Local (efficient)
State (inefficient)
Federal (extremly inefficient)
Federaly run program are extremly inefficient example : FEMA
simontimon2 2 years ago
well obama care doesnt exist there isnt anything called obama care and i guess u now found out that there isnt a public option so far that if "health care" passes it will be more money to the insurance companys more people go bankrupted unless we have a public option and it seems that what we call a public option if we get one will be medicare buy in only for people who want it it wont affect any1 who wants nothing to do with it
kazooga1234 1 year ago
I sympathize with you. I make comments on youtube and will throw in websites, or sources and never do I get sources given back to me. Just a bunch of rubbish comments that are so opinionated that it drives any common sensed person crazy. My wife thinks I am crazy for wasting my free time talking to closed minded people, but I still want to believe that in this wonderful country, people listen to reason... well some do, just not those whom reply to me. Your the man, and your sources are right.
MrSeanselleck 1 year ago
lmao
spiderwebb33 2 years ago
@simontimon2 hahaha you're so dumb, you actually think HK's health care is "pure free market"
BenkaiDebussy 1 year ago
Well guess what, there's no such thing as a pure free market as long as government exists.
simontimon2 1 year ago
@simontimon2 Yeah, and that is exactly why certain industries, like health care insurance, should be socialized. The government is necessary for certain things.
BenkaiDebussy 1 year ago
The United States already has socialised health care. Because if you are sick and you go to any hospital your gona get treated.
simontimon2 1 year ago
@simontimon2 That isn't what socialized means. Socialized means that the government owns and controls a given industry. Also, you still get billed for going to the ER, and those who can't pay the bills not only get their credit ruined, but it increases the costs for those who can.
The situation would benefit in almost every way if we had legitimate single-payer health insurance.
BenkaiDebussy 1 year ago
To do that taxes would have to double and do you think the country in a ression is capable of achieving that.
simontimon2 1 year ago
@simontimon2 Do you realize that every other country with UHC/socialized health care pays at MOST half of what we do per capita on health care? If we implement UHC in the same way other countries have, we will end up spending far, far less than we do with our current system. Taxes do go up, but they go up far less than people are paying right now in insurnace premiums. This makes sense; insurance costs go down when you have more people in your risk pool.
BenkaiDebussy 1 year ago
Do you realize that the country bankruped and can't afford it.
simontimon2 1 year ago
newsish i love u i found one of those morons and sent this to them and they just keep trolling caz they have no facts to say
kazooga1234 2 years ago
Yea , I must be crazy , I should get info from Wikipedia instead of directly from the source !
MindofaJedi 2 years ago
Your wouldn't even know how to interpret the source. They have the worst accounting methods. Try reading the news!
UncommonThinker 2 years ago
Wikipedia has a simple straight forward articles. The cbo and white house web sites are filled with jargon and little straight answers.
UncommonThinker 2 years ago
Steven Hawking was born in the U.K, And he still lives there. They do do some things right in socialism.
UncommonThinker 2 years ago
Medicare works really well , Humana is run much worse . It is sad that people think universal health care would cost us too much , when the truth is 50% of your taxes go to the military alone . The f-22 Raptor doesn't work and has never been used in combat , the Pentagon said we should never build another one , so we are building 150 more at 200 million dollars a piece !
MindofaJedi 2 years ago
Based off this years budget, the military is roughly 15% of the federal budget. Entitlement spending already accounds for most of our taxes. You shouldn't just make stuff up on the fly.
UncommonThinker 2 years ago
Yea , except that I got my info directly off the whitehouse website . 15% is hillarious . It has never been that low in our nation's history . Next year's budget is 587 billion for the Department of Defense , then you have the Department of Veterans Affairs and also several programs fall under Health and Human services , especially checks sent to veterans widows and counseling rehabing veterans outside of the V A hospitals . Total cost of the military in 2010 about 675 Billion .
MindofaJedi 2 years ago 2
The total federal budget was 3.1 trillion dollars. I know thats a lot of numbers to punch into a calculator but defence spending is still around 20% of the federal budget. And that still excludes emergency legislation such as the stimulus and tarp bills. I stand by my original statement. Social security was projected to cost 644 billion this year. But atleast you got to laugh before reality set in.
UncommonThinker 2 years ago
The federal budget for 2010 is under 2 trillion dollars and Social Security is only 11.6 billion . Its OK you were only off by 630 billion dollars or so . Social Security is one sixtieth that's right 1 60th of the Department of Defense . Look it up , it is easily available. If you still stand by your statement then you cannot read or you are making things up off the top of your head .
MindofaJedi 2 years ago
Ha, you may wish to double check that. Thats probably just the administration costs or something.
UncommonThinker 2 years ago
Thats not true... u can go right back to wiki and see spending break downs with Defense getting 21% 56% if you include mandatory spending not SS or MM or the wars we are in which will be counted btw for the time under this admin SS and MM are 44% so entitlements dont count for half. its high but if you cut dum wars no bid contracts that dont benefit the tax payer and for profit health care you can cut cost significantly
nuumskee 2 years ago
NON-profit medicare costs way more than for profit healthcare. Medicare fraud is estimated to be as high as 60 billion a year. And the lack of medical innovation around the world means the US is the single greatest hope for finding better treatments and cures for diseases that affect every person on the planet. Profit brings out the motivation in people. But if you wish to do it for free then I won't stop you!
UncommonThinker 2 years ago
UncommonThinker:
Please provide stats to back up your statement that non-profit medicare costs are "way more" than for-profit healthcare.
Also, since you have provided only 60 billion as the fraud that is committed on Medicare, could you kindly provide the statistic for the dollar value of fraud that is committed each year against private health insurers. (It is meaningless to provide one figure without the other.)
RepublicStanding 2 years ago
he was being sarcastic about the medicare being more then insurance companys and he was also being sarcastic about a lot of other things he wasnt being serious he was saying that medicare and medicade work and ya there r prob some fraud but there would be less of it if people could buy into medicare
kazooga1234 1 year ago
Thats more like 20% not 50% and that federal tax.
simontimon2 2 years ago
Haha funny but true.
Seleucus84 2 years ago
I KNEW IT!
JmufucknM 2 years ago
dude i love u for posting this so much i mention something bout medicare and then some moron said a bunch of lies and i just said i can prove it and sent them this link and that shut them right up
kazooga1234 2 years ago
well, yeah we have Medicare in Australia, and it's def sending us bankrupt!
you go to the doctor, and it doesn't cost anything...your taxes have already paid for it.
Single mothers can afford to raise their children without resorting to porn...
and not have to worry about what they're going to do if their kids have a fever...
the people can't afford public transport, so everyone owns a car...
yep, public health definitely does NOT work :p
f'n morons lol
MythicalSword 2 years ago
My Australian friends tells me that if you're on welfare the government pays for your porn. Sign me up - that'll save me thousands every year.
Newsish 2 years ago
yeah, porn is a requisite consumable here, the department of social security actually check to make sure you've searched and reviewed at least 4 porn vids b4 they'll give you a payment!
lol
MythicalSword 2 years ago
Hang on sir...I'm totally for medicare. I 100% agree that all the bad news surrounding national healthcare is based on the private sector pumping Fox news with scarey fake data. Read what I said again please. I was referring to your tort reform comment.
strakallah 2 years ago
Oops, my bad, read your comment wrong.
Newsish 2 years ago
Heh, that's ok. Hey, if you want to talk to someone that has first hand experience with national health, talk to me. I grew up in the USA and lived there till 25. I moved to Australia where we have medicare for everyone. There are more benefits to national health other than the financial ones. Been here for 9 years and have no intention of going back.
strakallah 2 years ago
I've heard the exact same thing from every expat I talk to - England, France, Australia all have better healthcare. Well, enjoy the good service down under, mate.
Newsish 2 years ago
sr, youre a huge fukkin nazi pig idiot
311ftw 2 years ago
So the only way to fix the system is to give a free pass to incompitent Dr's? That might work with economics but it's not an actual solution. However, most of your points are tongue in cheek so I'm not really sure if you were being serious in that part of your video.
strakallah 2 years ago
Still gonna run out of money.
nubraskan 2 years ago
Your gist of big govt run healthcare never works is a load of hypothetical bullshit. If you step out into the real world, not too far, just North across the border, what you will see is a big govt working. Oh, what's that - they pay more taxes? Alright, but their coverage is not dropped and they don't go bankrupt (even if they earn above average)...too many to list...you dumb fuck
vsurf2007 2 years ago
Something tells me that you didn't quite catch the real point of the video.
Newsish 2 years ago
you know what they say, libs will be libs hahaha
CharlesHorman 2 years ago
Did you not detect the blatant sarcasm?
Raizhen010 2 years ago 2
great video. Subscribed
videosfromderelix 2 years ago
DXS:
The USA uses TOO MANY healthcare delivery systems. WE NEED TO SIMPLIFY to minimize admin costs & to maximize economies of scale. LET'S PICK 1 OR 2!
UK system is like the VA & DOD (gov't directs all doctors & builds facilities).
French system is like standard Medicare (single-payer base insurance plan with supplemental ins allowed for non-covered extras).
Swiss system is like individual insurance in MA (mandatory & nondiscriminatory).
Germans primarily use an employer-centric system.
RepublicStanding 2 years ago
YOu may also want to take a look at Scandinavian Models, they seem pretty effecient.
NerdRoomProductions 2 years ago
lol
UberGodless 2 years ago
fuckin zing, i just wish his delivery was better
GretnaBlast 2 years ago
great job newish
kytomasi 2 years ago
Why waste so much energy on being sarcastic and not getting to the root of the problem? Are you just in this because you enjoy making people look bad or do you have a desire to get to the root of the problem. Once you finally see the root of the problem, do you have enough virtue to accept the problem and really work for a solution?
Medicine good=people live longer.
Abortion bad=fewer people to support those who are living longer. No system will work until we fix the REAL problem.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
The only problem is that we also have an overpopulation problem on this planet which is quickly heading us towards an energy crisis which will finish off all of our fuel, leaving us helpless (since we haven't been developing alternative sources of energy quickly enough) to transport food and service across the country and the world. And if we did make abortion illegal, women would do it anyways, only in much less safe ways to their health (i.e. rusty coat hangers). That's a disturbing truth.
seanotube85 2 years ago
You have no substantial evidence to prove that we are overpopulated, rather there is overwhelming evidence that overpopulation is a myth. Please check out the youtube video "Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth". Even if we are so "overpopulated" does that give those humans who are born the right to exterminate the humans who have not been born? The impartial U.S. economy says no. Our economy is collapsing because of it. More people are drawing benefits than there are people to contribute.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
seanotube
Go take a look in the dumpster of a restaurant. Or a grocery store. We do not have a food shortage and when we listen to overly emotional environmentalists who don't employ reason when spouting off at the mouth, we do things like use all of our corn production to try and produce efficient fuel. This takes food away from live stock and drives up the cost of raising livestock. Everything that uses corn syrup becomes more expensive to produce.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
And the most disturbing effect on the environment that the overpopulation myth has advanced is the estrogen in our water system. Do a youtube search for "estrogen in the water". The contraceptive pill has tainted our water system and the problem is so bad that fish are being mutated. Not being a doctor, I can only speculate that estrogen poisoning is the main cause for ED which appears to be an epidemic in the U.S. if you watch commercials on TV.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
And then to say the "women would do it anyways" is completely unfounded. The mentally unhealthy women might attempt it but there are 3,000 abortions per day and the number of women joining "Silent No More", women who have had abortions and who deeply regret it and many of them who reveal the truth that they were coerced into getting an abortion either by their parents or boyfriend, husband, or even their doctor, those women would be having children.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
Fertility and Pregnancy are natural. Those who think that it is ok to chemically compromise a woman's natural fertility are doing something gravely wrong. The pill harms a woman's endocrine system. You take a pill because you are sick, not because your body is working properly. The inconvenient truth for you seanotube is that more women have died from legalized abortion than who died from back alley abortions. And the harm that legalizing abortion has done to society is revealed in our economy.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
"Fertility and Pregnancy are natural."
So is cancer. Do you think it's wrong to chemically compromise a tumor?
"more women have died from legalized abortion than who died from back alley abortions."
And more women die from giving birth than all kinds of abortions put together. Abortion is safer than childbirth.
SisyphusRedeemed 2 years ago
Fertility is a function of the human reproductive system.
What system is cancer a function of?
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
Woah, woah, woah, since when does something have to be a function of a system to be 'natural'? You made the claim that 'fertility and pregnancy are natural', as if that had some sort of normative significance. Now you're moving the goal posts and saying that something has to be a function of a system. Make up your mind.
But for the record, cancer is a function of mutations in the genes of somatic cells. Not a 'system', granted, but still a function, and still natural.
SisyphusRedeemed 2 years ago
Nothing's being moved, you're just not thinking your erroneous logic through.
It doesn't take a genius to observe the biological fact that the human reproductive system has the specific purpose of generating other members of the species homo sapiens.
The natural function of the female and male reproductive system is to produce a gamete. The haploid is produced for the purpose of mixing with it's complement and generating a human. But might I add that you started this tangent.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
And the nose has the specific function of holding up our spectacles. There is no such thing as 'purpose' in nature, and scientists gave up on such teleological thinking in the 1600. There are laws, there are processes, but there haven't been any purposes since we threw out Aristotle.
SisyphusRedeemed 2 years ago
Contraception treats a natural function of the human reproductive system as if it is a disease or a dysfunction. You have used the example of cancer. Fertility means that a woman's reproductive system is working properly. It is working according to its natural function. It is natural. You take a pill for a headache or to treat something that IS NOT working properly in an attempt to return the body back to a healthy state. But in reality, the pill brakes a woman's body.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
So what do you think of someone who takes an immunosuppressant drugs to ensure that their body doesn't reject a transplanted heart? Such drugs interfere with the natural functioning of a bodily system. Do you think that's immoral or wrong? Would you rather such a person dies?
SisyphusRedeemed 2 years ago
So I take it you are just going to jump from one thing to the next and avoid the "Economics of Medicare" discussion. I would hope that an intelligent person would realize that the taking of immunosuppressants for the purpose of replacing a failing body part falls within the same bounds as taking poisonous chemo to stop cancer.
Please stop being a punk. You've jumped 3 topics now. Since life is dynamic, I'm sure you won't soon exhaust tangents. How about back to Medicare then? Stay on topic.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
I've never engaged in the Medicare discussion with you. I picked up a comment you made about contraception and we ran with it.
And I'm not 'jumping topics'; I'm simply exploring the logical implications of your position. You've said that 'interfering with a natural function of a human system' is somehow wrong. If you sincerely believe that, they you are committed to a number of absurd positions (such as rejecting immunosuppressants. You don't want to accept this conclusion, but it follows.
SisyphusRedeemed 2 years ago
Sisyphus
You should not engage in a reductio ad absurdum unless you understand the dynamics of the topic you are discussing. You are not using this technique like a philosopher but more as a politician or rather a neo atheist who enjoys pseudo intellectual gymnastics.
"But it follows." no it doesn't, non sequitur. In one case the body is not functioning properly and so you have to suppress the immune system to allow a transplant. In the case of contraception, you medicate a healthy function.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
If I've got it now, this is your point:
The statement 'it is immoral to interfere with the natural functioning of a human bodily system' is a general rule, but one that has exceptions, such as when it is necessary to restore or maintain the functioning of another system.
So naturally you think taking birth control pills are okay, since they help prevent cancer, cystic fibroadenomas & pelvic infection, and hence qualify for the exception to your rule, right?
SisyphusRedeemed 2 years ago
Yes sisyphus, you are still jumping because you are jumping to absurdities before you have laid down a rational point of departure. You could say something like. "It's ok to take a pill that causes a woman's body to think it is pregnant thus subverting the process of ovulation because a woman has a fundamental right to a robust sex life if she so chooses". But you haven't stated anything like that. You're just being a punk who isn't standing on any ground. You're just jumping.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
I'm trying to explore the logical implications of your argument. If you think that makes me a 'punk' then so be it. All I care about is if your position is a sensible and coherent one. If my understanding of your position is incorrect then please, correct me. Calling me names really gets you nowhere, and just makes it look like you're afraid to consider objections.
SisyphusRedeemed 2 years ago
"I picked up on a comment you made about contraception"
The comment was about how contraception and abortion have ruined our economy. Now there are fewer people entering the work force than there are retiring and drawing benefits. So you started off by jumping topic and then each subsequent comment you posted was a further jump. It's a common pattern in pseudo intellectual atheists.
Chemo - immunosuppressants are not of the same discussion. They promote health and contraception subverts health.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
In point of fact, contraception & abortion have helped the economy. Unwanted babies are much more likely grow up to be criminals. This is why there was a massive drop in the crime rate just about 16 years after Roe V. Wade.
We have more than enough people in the work force, way more than we need, in fact. Our population is unsustainably large, given our current rates of consumption.
And my atheism has nothing to do with this conversation. Please, let's leave the ad hominems out of this.
SisyphusRedeemed 2 years ago
Since you don't want to talk about why Medicare is going bankrupt, maybe you would like to take this discussion to a private corrispondance or maybe comment on a Kresta video that deals with the things you are talking about.
Because as it is, you are just being a punk. Medicare is going bankrupt right now. It is because we have contracepted and aborted our population to an unsustainable degree. Atheists should get off their religious high horse and start looking at the facts.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
Our population has increased by 50% over the last 40 years. Contraception has been legal that whole time, and abortion legal nationally for 33 of those years. 50% in 40 years is a remarkable, and unsustainable rate of growth. It is also way more than is needed to replace and support retirees.
You quite literally could not be more wrong. Not only has abortion and contraception not adversely hindered population growth, it has helped the economy. We need fewer, not more people on this planet.
SisyphusRedeemed 2 years ago
Medicare is an efficient system, so why is it going bankrupt. Medicare only has a 2% overhead. It should not be going bankrupt. What is the problem then? The problem is that there are more people drawing benefits than there are people contributing benefits.
Advancements in medicine have caused people to live longer. Abortion and contraception have caused fewer people to be born. The baby boom generation is retiring now and living longer. You can't have a system where 1 contributes and 5 take.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
The fact is, Medicare is bankrupt because we have contracepted and aborted the future of medicare. When medicare was started we were a population that replaced itself. Medicare worked. You could spread the financial burden across a large number of shoulders and the burden was not so great to be unjust. That is what insurance is. People contribute so as to be covered in time of need. The more people contribute the less the individual has to pay in order to sustain the system. No people no system.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
you are aware the population is exploding, right? Are you also saying there are 5 people over 65 on Medicare for every 1 person not on it? Cuz thats ridiculous.
JohnnyMEldridge 2 years ago
Johnny
Beginning in 2011, the first of 78 million baby boomers (people born between 1946 and 1964) will start the transition to retirement, kicking off an expansion in the number of elderly people that will continue for decades. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, one out of every nine baby boomers will live to be at least age 90.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
Cancer is not natural to the human body. That is why you treat it. If left untreated the result is death of the human. A person goes on chemo because they are trying to fix a dysfunction in their body. Wouldn't you agree that fixing a dysfunction is a different act than trying to chemically frustrate a natural function? To put it yet another way, the purpose of reproductive anatomy is to produce the material needed to generate human life. Ovaries make eggs.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
Of course cancer is natural--it happens in all mammals, and many non-mammalian species. It is part of nature. What else could you mean? Surely you don't think that cancer is SUPERnatural, do you? Nor do you think it's artificial, like plastic. So what else could it be, other than natural?
You seem to be conflating 'natural' with 'desirable.' That is foolish for many reasons, not the least of which is the fact that cancer, lupus, cholera, etc. are all natural.
SisyphusRedeemed 2 years ago
Are you seriously arguing against birth control? Wow. Let me just say this. There are women out there who take Birth Control because their cycles are so irregular, infertility could occur. Are you saying were should get rid of conctraceptives? Tell that to Africans who are dying daily due to an HIV/AIDS epidemic.
Raizhen010 2 years ago
Raizhen
I am saying that Medicare is unsustainable because we have contracepted and aborted the people who were supposed to be here to replace those who would retire. We have unnaturally changed our nation's demographic and our economy is finally showing us that. We have made advancements in medicine which has the good result of causing people to live longer. Are you seriously saying that contraception and abortion have not reduced the number of people?
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
Raizhen
And now an off topic response. Are you seriously saying that the only way to treat irregular cycles is to take the pill? You are wrong. Talk to an OBGYN about your error.
Are you saying that the pill fights HIV/AIDS? I just don't have an answer for that but I think I'm taking you out of context so why don't you just stay on the topic of Medicare then. Oh wait, you never addressed it, you just have an emotional attachment to a bad sex product.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
When did I say it's the only way?Nonetheless, it is an EFFECTIVE way to treat irregular cycles. And the pill doesn't fight HIV/AIDS. I never meant to imply that. You seem to have a disgust for contraceptives in general. I was referring to condoms, another contraceptive which do help prevent HIV.
I'm curious though. How would you prevent abortions without contraceptives? Like it or not, the only way to lower the number of abortions is to reduce unwanted pregnancies.
Raizhen010 2 years ago
"Contraceptives reduce Abortion"
That's one of the same arguments that Dr. Bernard Nathanson advanced when he founded NARAL. Dr. Nathanson is now a pro life speaker. And so is Norma McCorvey who was Jane Roe in Roe v. Wade. So the founder of NARAL and the defendant in the landmark abortion case are both now bro life. That alone speaks volumes but your theory that contraceptives reduce abortion, how about you look up the statistics on that. You are incredibly wrong.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
Contraception gives people a false license to have more sex with more people. Do you know where babies come from?
What has also happened is the spread of STDs because people indoctrinate kids into thinking that condoms = safe sex. This is false. Condoms don't protect against HPV and now HPV is the largest STD in the world and growing. And AIDS is still a thriving STD. Why? Because you don't employ a device that enables promiscuity and get the effect of reducing sexually transmitted diseases.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
so, why not use a public health care system to treat the people with the STD... you know, attack the problem at the source?
Oh, that's right... people keep telling me that Americans don't want to vote for Public Health... they'd rather head over to Africa to have sex with starving children who have to eat monkeys to survive!
MythicalSword 2 years ago
MythicalSword
Don't you realize that a Federalize Public Option is unsustainable because there are more people retiring and drawing benefits than there are people being born and entering into the work force and contributing to the benefits? That is why Medicare, Social Security, The Post office ($5.6 billion in retired health benefits), The Housing Market, and current insurance plans are all tanking. We have contracepted and aborted our economic future.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
Ha ha ha you meagre fool: that's why we have a Future Fund! you amerikans have no idea about sound fiscal management practices :P
lolol
MythicalSword 2 years ago
MythSword
Are you under the illusion that a town can't curb STDs without the help of the Federal Government? In a small town you have numbers that are actually addressable by us citizens. It is when the Fed throws national numbers and world numbers at people, that people loose confidence in their ability to take care of themselves. If people start taking care of their community and respecting natural law, the problem will be fixed.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
natural law says people want to have sex. at least to men with balls and women with ovaries.
If a person has access to health care, they are more likely to be healthy and, if they contract an STD, more likely to not only have themselves checked, but to refer the other party to a *FREE* doctor!!!
I know, it works.
you lose
MythicalSword 2 years ago
We have made advancements in medicine, and those advancements cause people to live longer. So we have a greater number of people retiring from the work force and living longer.
Abortion and contraception have unnaturally reduced the number of people entering the work force. Some of us are smart enough to realize that if you have a system where 5 people are waiting for a resource and there is only 1 person contributing a resource, you have a doomed system, rationing, fights.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
So are you going to explain why Obama says that medicare is going bankrupt? youtube search "Obama's Medicare Flip Flop"
So while you are spending your time making a video that you think is clever, all you have done is to illustrate that the government program is a better program BUT STILL GOING BANKRUPT. Well run programs shouldn't tank. Why is this happening? It is because abortion and contraception have reduced the number of people entering the work force. More people take than contribute.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
You get an A for effort, but an F for comprehension and math.
Newsish 2 years ago
Well that's a nice vague statement which has no substance to build upon and is the same kind of character attack that I expected.
Medicare has only a 2% overhead. A system with so little overhead should not be failing. And if it isn't failing then our President should not be saying it is.
The reason why it is failing is because of the unnatural reduction of people (from contraception and abortion) who will, now, not contribute to the resources needed to keep the system going.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
I repeat my previous statement. If only some one would make some sort of video addressing these concerns.
Newsish 2 years ago
yes, Kresta, you should definitely go to India or Africa, where everyone has lots of kids, all those countries where the average population is below 25 years old... they definitely have a strong workforce that could support your communist ideals... and I'm sure they'd love to have you as a citizen: much more than we would, at least :p
MythicalSword 2 years ago
Didn't John Paul 2, Lech Wałęsa, and Ronald Reagan destroy communism? Why would we want it back. Isn't that why this whole debate is taking place?
Pope Benedict has time and time again pointed out that 3rd world countries have been able to get out of the 3rd wold because they have the population to do so. So that means that the contraception plans that the UN would like to have imposed would have hindered the development of these countries.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
ask China about Ronald Reagan mate
MythicalSword 2 years ago
We've got enough to deal with right now with the health care debate. No need to walk down the path of a non sequitur. A public option is unsustainable due to the unnatural demographic shift that contraception and abortion has caused in our country. There are more people retiring than there are people entering the work force. There are more people drawing benefits than there are contributing. Not only would a federalized system be doomed, the system we have now is tanking.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
Communism also fell because of the inefficiency of centralization. Russia lost 1/3 of their grain production because they centralized its distribution. So let's say I'm a farmer. I have to put the grain that I produce on a train. That train goes to a federal centralized point and then gets rationed and sent back out around Russia and to me, the one who grew it.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
Oh, and ask Hu Jintao about third world population.
And ask Nigeria if it's population they need, or a fair price for oil and a stable political system.
you greatly oversimplify your hack-like rhetoric to return to the same obsolete point regarding contraception. Ask Hu Jintao how China's going to compete with the US: population growth (NO) or industrialisation (yes).
fight the facts, krestaTheSophist.
by quoting Joseph Alois Ratzinger, and Reagan, you've revealed your bias.
MythicalSword 2 years ago
Or maybe we can focus on the problem in the United States. This is the problem with socialism. People pretend that they know what is going on in other countries and ignore the problems in their own back yard. The U.S. Federal government throws out unmanageable national statistics on health care and overwhelms the citizen who can contribute to a solution for the manageable problems in their own state.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
USA has the problem. Socialism functions perfectly well for the rest of the world. Sure, I can't speak from personal experience at having died after being refused healthcare @ a US hospital, but I can definitely tell all you yanks that it's damn nice to be able to access healthcare when I need it. :) hehehe, suckers! but, really, it's ppl like kresta u need to confront with the truth of the economics if u wanna access healthcare.
MythicalSword 2 years ago
Contraception and Abortion have killed the sustainability of the U.S. economy. We have built an infrastructure that demands people be a part of it. That is why social security and Medicare worked when it was started. But now everything is falling apart due to the extermination of the people who were supposed to be here.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
yep...300,000,000 and counting... just let me know how many people u want ontop of, and underneath you when you don't have a backyard to throw a ball for the dog.
you want what, 1.5billion? good luck! why not just invite the Mexicans to join you there, that'll make it nice & cozy!
oh, and help with you healthcare schamozzle!
MythicalSword 2 years ago
How about you take a look at the number of people who will be retiring in 2011. The baby boom generation will be retiring. And the baby doom generation is not prepared to face the future in the light of reality.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
yep. Definitely, an entire generation of people who have paid their taxes their whole lives, and what would be the decent thing that could be done for them?
what would Jesus do for someone who had paid him a goodly percentage of their life's hard-gotten gains? Would Jesus turn them away at the hospital door? Or would Jesus be tearing up the health insurance company's balance sheets shouting "there'll be no usury here!"?
Sorry, but I can't account for your past governments' poor choices.
MythicalSword 2 years ago
You talk like there is some kind of magic way to recover from all of the people that the U.S. has Aborted. Universal health care is something that the U.S. Catholic Bishops have been pressing for 15 years now. But the buck stops where coverage for abortion and contraception starts. It is also clear that the private sector is the proper place to build such a mechanism. The government's job is to curtail abuses. All you are doing is preaching to a stereotype, try having a conversation.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
The Catholic Church has built 624 hospitals in the U.S.
How many have they built in Australia?
Is the Catholic Church not a major player in the health care discussion?
What is your background. To what do you attribute your insight?
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
hmmmm so, this explains your conflict of interest!
The Catholic Church is already raking too much profit from private health. ok. thanks for explaining.
As for no contraception: You just want more plebs for menial tasks?
sure, but remember that even plebs deserve a decent standard of living.
(by plebs I mean 'trailer park trash' ie. the ppl who have been abused and discarded by the Catholic church)
Go Kresta Go Kresta: push your rhetoric! :p
but seriously: Wake Up America!
MythicalSword 2 years ago
MythicalSword
So explain why Medicare, Social Security, The housing market, and others are collapsing. If you want to stand with your head in the sand then have fun but others who understand facts and demographics are actually working for a solution. You seem insistent on contributing hate. Why? Do you want the problem to get worse?
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
mate, that's your problem. You're the yank, use your own think tank. All I can do is tell you that the system works for the rest of us. If you guys over there on the flipside can't figure out how to run your own economy effectively, that's your bad luck.
Here, they are NOT collapsing. I can tell you that. While we're at it; how much profit does the military make?
MythicalSword 2 years ago
In about an hour, we are going to be talking Live on the Kresta in the Afternoon Blog. The topic will be President Obama's last night about health care reform.
We talk with Bishop Samuel Aquila of Fargo, N.D., Leonard Nelson, author of Diagnosis Critical, Kristen Day of Democrats for Life, Douglas Johnson of National Right to Life, and Kevin Schmeising of the Acton Institute.
KrestaInTheAfternoon 2 years ago
Well done Newish.
I particularly liked the nod to the remark about poor Dr Hawkings had he been a UK citizen. Thank the Red White and Blue that he was a US citizen and didn't get aborted by some care rationing socialist system like they have in Britain.
What ever would he have done without American care....... idiots. The speech software has an american accent..... he must be american.
Keep it coming.
littleguypainting 2 years ago
Nice Job well done Newish. To those who oppose reform and te Public Option or A Single Payer like Medicare I say this, You will get old one day also (if your lucky) and when you do do you hope someone will care for you and help you or do you put all of your FAITH in the Almighty Capitalist System that is causing us all to PAY more and More for getting sick ?
1234uz 2 years ago
Reagan lowered taxes and tax revenues increased.... explain that NEWSISH!!!!
collins1188 2 years ago
"psh...all that does is prove how efficient private insurance is at raising prices." lol! excellent.
sisforshayla 2 years ago
Nothing but strawman arguments, adhominems, poisoning the well, and other various logical fallacies.
eagleeye1975 2 years ago
You don't just get to say that and then walk away - elaborate.
Newsish 2 years ago
Oh, I certainly do get to just walk away from that... your arguments are not even worth addressing due to the obvious logical fallacies they're based on, so... good day.
eagleeye1975 2 years ago
As always, your videos are brilliant.
Also, if Hawkings says something just accept it as fact ^^.
DrQuijano 2 years ago
Can we have socialized medicine for pets?
dwbear7 2 years ago
Where we should start on health care reform is to allow people to buy insurance where they please and pass loser pays tort reform (like Europe has! Yah!).
Most other government reform at the federal level would be unconstitutional. Read Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. The Congress is not permitted to regulate or sell health insurance. If you want socialized, go do it on a state level. California is a great place to start.....
Americaisgreat123 2 years ago
"Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; "
Have someone read it to you, maybe?
packetscan 2 years ago
Ya, but what does healthcare have to do with the "general welfare"?
Newsish 2 years ago
Ask a legal scholar. Go research the founding of this country. Look what President James Madison, the father of the Constitution, had to say about these words. If you open up the floodgates of by allowing government to intervene into the economy (which was generally unconstitutional for the majority of our history), then those words have no meaning. We already have tons of unconstitutional government, it would only be more of a disgrace to continue down this road.
Statism is unconstitutional.
Americaisgreat123 2 years ago
I'm strongly against the current statist reform, but am not an anti-reformer.
Regardless of your political persuasion, the only way Medicare can possibly remain funded is by sharply cutting benefits and sharply increasing payroll taxes. Medicare gives you all the benefits of single payer socialist health care, but none of the downturns. This is why it is going bankrupt. Canada or England's socialized health care is not going bankrupt because they pay high taxes and ration care to high heaven.
Americaisgreat123 2 years ago
good vid.
thank you, again.
xTjPx 2 years ago
free market, free enterprise... let it work
Jaconfilm 2 years ago
not funny at all
titanhusker 2 years ago