By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - What happens if ObamaCare is overturned?

What Kasz216 said.

Also, el oh el to the guy who trusts the government to regulate things over the private sector.



BOOM!  FACE KICK!

Around the Network
comawhite94 said:

Off topic, but am I the only one who would favor tax funded universal health care?  

No, you aren't the only one.

The moment the government wanted EVERYONE to have health insurance, I wondered why we couldn't just get rid of health insurance altogether.  The day that happens is a miracle though, with the amount of money the healthcare industry pumps into washington.



Money can't buy happiness. Just video games, which make me happy.

thranx said:
spaceguy said:
thranx said:
Mr Khan said:
Honestly the Japanese setup seems to be the better option. They have aboveboard single-payer (that is, it's not hidden in taxes, you pay in up-front), and then they subsidize a certain amount of your health care based on your income bracket. They forced all study-abroad students to enroll, so i got 75% off all health treatments (never needed one, but one or two students did in the course of the semester), and then paid the lowest level of payments in. Japan has much lower health-care costs across the board, too, something that needs to be done in America (with lower pay for doctors, for one, despite much of their system being privately run)


I think the average Japanese person is more healthy than the average American. That probably plays a big part.

Sounds like this is heavily regulated.  America is all about no regulation. Some seem to think that the greedy CEO at the top is going to make the best decision for everyone.  Not the case, the greedy will chose money over a dieing baby in the room with them . Thats the simple truth people don't want to see.


Huh? How is any of tha related to the Japanese living a healthier life style than Americans and thus having less costs for healthcare?


the point that he said you pay off your pay scale. That is a regulation, a good one but others in US do not like regulation. It's all or nothing with some people. I think there is a good grey area.



xwan said:

We lose about 10 years of productivity and rack up 200k of debt for being a doctor, it is NOT all glamor. it is hard work.

Yes, it is hard work.  I will agree with you on that.  Can be long hours, stressful work, etc.

But sorry, I simply cannot agree with you on it not being glamour.  Earning 200k a year for 35 years (age 30-65) will mean $7 million in earnings.  Earning $50k per year with a college degree will net you a little over $2 million in earnings in a career lasting over 40 years.

Doctors are WELL compensated (as indicated above, $5 million extra in a lifetime) for their additional schooling and hard/stressful work.



Money can't buy happiness. Just video games, which make me happy.

Jexy said:
What Kasz216 said.

Also, el oh el to the guy who trusts the government to regulate things over the private sector.



Yea because a company that has waste won't dump it into your drinking water if they don't regulate him to not do so. So yes the government is there to stop those things. There is a lot of good regulation and bad regulation. This is not a all or nothing, there is a grey area. GOV. plays a major role. sorry you don't think so. People die off of unregulated companies all the time. If you didn't know that you are not informed but you go ahead and trust a person who see's profits over people.



Around the Network
Baalzamon said:
comawhite94 said:

Off topic, but am I the only one who would favor tax funded universal health care?  

No, you aren't the only one.

The moment the government wanted EVERYONE to have health insurance, I wondered why we couldn't just get rid of health insurance altogether.  The day that happens is a miracle though, with the amount of money the healthcare industry pumps into washington.

No there is a lot of people who think like you and I'm one of them. The 1% has done a very good advertisement in blaming government rather then them. It's a trick, look at them not us. Also these same people have pushed there own in gov. and then say o the gov. does not work, when they where the ones who broke it.



Jexy said:
What Kasz216 said.

Also, el oh el to the guy who trusts the government to regulate things over the private sector.

also to add to that. Gov. give you your safe working enviroment, your 40 hour work week rather then 60, Over time. Better pay and many things you seem to think is not right. So if you think this is not right then go to mexico where you make sh-t and work non stop, have sh-tty working habits and get paid nothing. Thats what the gov does for you. It helps you make the money you should be, even though we now are getting paid the least amount we have made per person since the 1930's. Sure products are cheaper but rent and survival is sky high. While the rich guy you don't want to regulate doesn't pay anything in tax's and push's things through the gov. to pay you less and give you less. So thats awsome you want to get rid of all that. WOW the people on the internet are so fun.



spaceguy said:
Kasz216 said:
spaceguy said:
So really single pay is the best option.

Eh, would you really trust this government with single payer?

They'd be promising back and forth to raise rates to win the Doctor Vote.

Not to mention, the US is the last "Late great" profit zone for people developing new medicines and new machines.

Despite the fact that the EU is a bigger economy (Or was, not sure now...) They only spend a fraction of what our government spends on healthcare research... let alone our markets in general... which spend way more then our government.  To compare a few nations.

http://www.psoriasis-cure-now.org/medical-research-funding-level-by-country-world-psoriasis-day-challenge/

for something longer...

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=us%20vs%20eu%20biomedical%20research%20spending&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CF4QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.acmedsci.ac.uk%2Fdownload.php%3Ffile%3D%2Fimages%2Fevent%2F1121788418.pdf&ei=LbfnT4aLDurC2wXXjuXaCQ&usg=AFQjCNFtWe_Fb6KcgBa1sn7nlUov7e4Dww&cad=rja

That's not even counting the fact that our private sector speds 2-3 times that.

If someone can come up with a way to replace 100 billion dollars worth of biomedical spending a year and NOT Make it one of the first cuts like in basically every other country... cool.

Right now though, it feel more like wondering how much farther along medical technology would be if everyone had a healthcare system like the US... and how much better off most people would be.

It's just way too each to cut medical funding and kill two birds with one stone.

Do you really trust health care for profit? I trust government more then I do corporations. I know government has become a dirty word but really why is that? Well A lot on the right starting blaming gov. For everything. Then they got elected, screw it all up and then say. See the government doens't work. Yea you just F'ed it all up and worrying about profits is the worst way to explain away the corruption going on.

Depends on your definition of "trust".

Companies aren't manaiacl super villians, I trust companies to do what they can for what's best for there profits.

So companies are extremley predictable.  Companies will only do something sketchy in one of two cases.

1) Most people won't know.

2) Most people won't care enough to change their buisness.

Trasnparity is supposed to be governments job.  So if people don't know about what's going on.. it's likely due to goverment corruption.

Meanwhile.  Government through elections usually has a 90% rentention rate.

In bad times that retention rates drops to a horrifyingly low....  80%.

Likewise, government has no clear motivation.  It's the goals of a dozens of people who mainly seem to want to just have "real power" and be decision makers.

With proper transparity.  Companies can be reasonably expected to take care of their consumers.

With proper transparity. Politicians will still do whatever the hell they want because they have ridiciliously high retention rates.

Look at Strom Thurmond, dude was so old, he was a Dixiecrat and he was a presidential candidate for the segregationist party!

Or Look at Dodd-Frank.  It's a banking bill... written by two people who have been heavily investigated because they got "sweetheart" loans from banks.

Meanwhile an executive says something racist or is caught having taken a bribe to move something in favor of a client/other company?  They're gone before it stops being a news story on CNN.

 

So to make a long answer short.   I don't trust either at all, but at least a corporation, you know there motivation... and that corporations will relativly be held to doing honest things with proper transparity... and where there isn't proper transpairty it's do to government either getting bribes, corruption or sticking there heads up their own asses.

Giving those same people MORE control over the issue can only lead to "More bribes, more corruption or the same level of sticking there heads up their own asses, but at a bigger cost to people."



Or for the short version.

Corporations can be reasonably trusted so long as the press or politicians are doing there jobs.

If neither are... I don't see how giving the incompetent people more power because they failed at their job is a good idea.



Kasz216 said:
Or for the short version.

Corporations can be reasonably trusted so long as the press or politicians are doing there jobs.

If neither are... I don't see how giving the incompetent people more power because they failed at their job is a good idea.

This is why I think the 3rd parties out there need to come together on a common goal. Transparency, getting money out of politics and bring the power back to the people