In cash-strapped Washington, President Obama’s $1 trillion health care law is presenting a tempting target for lawmakers seeking funds for other projects, as Congress last week raided the health care piggy bank for the third time in less than a year. Just like the social security “lock box”, if you leave a pile of money laying around in Washington DC, some crooks will inevitably come by and swipe it. We call those crooks “representative” and “senator.” The joke is that Obamacare was already underfunded, requiring 10 yrs of taxes to pay for 6 yrs of benefits. At this rate, it may be broke after 6 months.
View Comments (254)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5HhbAWYjbg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6t-R3pWrRw
"But Europeans aren’t stupid."
There she goes again, stating "facts" as if they were settled.
“But Europeans aren’t stupid.”
There she goes again, stating “facts” as if they were settled.
******************|
Just debunking that popular right wing misconception, that people from other nations are somehow less informed and less enlightened than proper right wing Amurricans who listen to FOX News.
If you have some reason to believe that Europeans DON'T hear the horror stories about this country's health care system, or that they're hankering after a system just like ours, feel free to share them here.
Or you could admit that you're just copying Kick's ploys: sitting back and demanding that I "prove" something to him that he has no intention of believing under any circumstances.....and then flinging childish insults whenever he gets his tail in a crack.
Or you could admit that you’re just copying Kick’s ploys: sitting back and demanding that I “prove” something to him that he has no intention of believing under any circumstances
Why would I or anyone else believe anything you post when it is only your opinion? Just because you say something it does become so especially when you are incapable using the Internet to support your opinions. When you project it is sadly hilarious. I am still waiting for your rebuttal about how access to health care will be solved under Obamacare and the $100T unfunded entitlement liability that already exists, which renders Obamacare broke since Congress has seen fit to raid the escrow account and leaves mandates on the new act also unfunded. You've ignored these questions for about two days. Why?
"…..and then flinging childish insults whenever he gets his tail in a crack."
Please provide a cut and paste where you successfully countered any argument I have made. Not just voicing your opinion but actually demonstrated via a link to a news piece or something verifiable.
Protip: The one and only link you provided (regarding preterm births) was not something you should have posted without reading it did not help your case.
The proper way to successfully defeat another debater::
I posted this as a counter to your assertion that life expectancy rates are lower here due to a lack of access to health care. You were wrong. That is the difference between talking out of your ass and actually supporting your positions
Sidekick November 27, 2011 at 8:38 pm
Rated Awesome! What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Could not resist one more link:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/08/16/whats_scary_about_health_care_reform_97901.html
FTA: In their 2006 book, “The Business of Health,” economists Robert L. Ohsfeldt and John E. Schneider set out to determine where the U.S. would rank in life span among developed nations if homicides and accidents are factored out. Their answer? First place.
http://www.amazon.com/Business-Health-Robert-Ohsfeldt/dp/0844742406
Now I’m done with you.
Of course, you don't expect her to actually even READ your post, since she knows it won't follow her c. diff line of thought. Be ready for a debuttal, not rebuttal.
Of course not but she probably looks like this when we call her out. I think this is amusing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zE1LbC4Fvs&noredirect=1
lol :D
That is highly probable. Yes, it is amusing.
How is just stating something debunking misconceptions? Someone should call Mythbusters they are going WAY out of their way.
That IS the communist liberal method. All the communists know everything because they are smart, so if one says something it becomes fact, true or not! It is one of the many wonders of communist dogs.
I don’t see a lot of Europeans clamoring to abandon socialized medicine for an inequitable one like ours.
**********************
Of course not, they were raised with that system and for them to change is a scary thing to them. Anyone that is asked to do something outside their comfort zone will balk at the idea.
***********************
Gosh, Poopajoe, that sounds awfully like the posters on this board. ;)
But Europeans aren't stupid. They've heard all the horror stories about uninsured Americans dying in ER waiting rooms, losing their life savings as the result of one major illness; having to cut pills in half because they couldn't afford the $200 for a new prescription; losing their health care when laid off from work. They don't want that in their own country. They also don't want to pay what we Americans pay for health care. They consider health care to be a RIGHT, not just a luxury commodity to be sold for a profit to the well-heeled. And they're willing to commit themselves to higher taxes to make that right a reality for all legal residents. (The savings on health insurance costs more than makes up for those taxes, in any case.)
It's rather like taking the high speed trains that I mentioned during another discussion. Right wingers balk at the idea of having high speed trains here in the U.S.----but I think that, if they ever actually rode on one, they'd see why so many other countries are using them.
Olivia unless you want to actually cite something other than your opinions, I’ll listen.
****************
I've provided information from my professional experience IN health care, Kick, but obviously you're too insecure to admit that 31 years in the field just might have taught me a few things that you don't know. Is that why you keep resorting to rude, childish demands and name calling?
******************
Until then, shut up. You are a pathetic liar and you have nothing. You say that the EU is not broke due to overwhelming debt caused by too much social spending. I say it is. Prove it isn’t.
*********************
Nothing doing, my boy, until YOU back up your contention that it IS----and with something a bit more substantial than "It's in all the papers."
And, no, I don't want to plow through a lot of opinion pieces, showing what Thomas Sowell thinks, or a bunch of statistics showing how popular your opinion is. I want YOU to defend your claim LOGICALLY, using YOUR own words. You haven't done this. Essentially, all you've done is parrot a rumor, which is a gross oversimplification of a complex, worldwide financial problem.
I'll remind you, too, that, even though YOU want to believe that Europe's nations are in financial trouble solely due to social programs, I don't see a lot of Europeans clamoring to abandon socialized medicine for an inequitable one like ours. The fact remains, too (though you clearly don't want to touch it with a 10 foot pole) that the system you're clinging to is far more expensive per capita than any other system in the world. So there's no logic to your position, nor does it make any particular fiscal sense.
I don’t see a lot of Europeans clamoring to abandon socialized medicine for an inequitable one like ours.
Of course not, they were raised with that system and for them to change is a scary thing to them. Anyone that is asked to do something outside their comfort zone will balk at the idea.
I'm throwing you my last bone on this topic. Read it don't read it. I couldn't care less
"I’ll remind you, too, that, even though YOU want to believe that Europe’s nations are in financial trouble solely due to social programs, I don’t see a lot of Europeans clamoring to abandon socialized medicine for an inequitable one like ours. The fact remains, too (though you clearly don’t want to touch it with a 10 foot pole) that the system you’re clinging to is far more expensive per capita than any other system in the world. So there’s no logic to your position, nor does it make any particular fiscal sense."
I never said solely, I said largely but is that is splitting hairs. Rhetorical question: ( that you couldn't answer anyway) if not social programs including ridiculously lavish retirement plans for government workers, why is the Euro about to collapse? It is sovereign debt. How did that debt build over time? It sure as hell wasn't because of defense spending or foreign aid. It was due to their entitlement programs. The people are rioting because they fear that they are going to lose them. Your incredibly dumb straw man about Europeans clamoring shows just how poorly you actually think. The Europeans, as I noted above, are rioting over this. There are governments collapsing and their day of reckoning is here.
Read this link:
http://news.yahoo.com/pressure-builds-eurozone-ponders-debt-solutions-171745129.html
The massive EU debt is threatening the Euro. Debt, Olivia, debt. They, like us, have floated bonds to pay for their entitlement programs. You tried to float the idea that the debt crisis is complex. It is not. The solutions are because the EU members likely will be unwilling or unable to cut the programs enough to reduce spending to sustainable levels. IMO, the Euro will collapse and the countries will return to their own currencies. Why should the Germans continually be on the hook to ensure that Greeks can retire early or pay for an Italian family's health care? The German people are resisting that and Merkel has to worry about her own government and political future.
Now, let's bring this all back to the US and Obamacare. I've now mentioned three times that we have $100T in unfunded entitlement liabilities. That should be enough to convince the most ardent Keynesian that that is unsustainable. Because of the passage of Obamacare, taxes are already being imposed on medical equipment (GE just moved its imaging manufacturing to China in part to avoid that tax since it is now cheaper to build overseas all thanks to Obamacare)
Obamacare may guarantee insurance but as I've stated before it does not guarantee access. In essence nothing changes except who pays. Just like many doctors today do not accept Medicaid, they wont accept the crappy government insurance plan(s) either. Why? Because the reimbursement will be too low and they will lose money. So, will the government force doctors to take the insurance? Maybe, but that is a form of slavery and any pretense that Obamacare was a benign "good thing" will be exposed as fraud. Thinking people know this already.
Further, let's say my carrier Blue Cross Blue Shield develops a lower service level plan to comply with Obamacare. A previously uninsured person who now has this new plan calls my doctor to make an appointment and when he is asked about his coverage he will be compared other patients seeking an appointment at the same time. Who do you think will get in? The cheaper guy won't be turned away necessarily but he will be offered a time months in the future in the hope he will go away. Dentists do this all the time.
So your utopian vision of equitable health care is a pipedream. It does not exist in Europe and it does not exist here either. The well-off Europeans do not submit to the waiting lines and rationing. They seek out private pay care. If they need something done electively they come here. If we ever have UHC, the same thing will happen here.
Cost, another one of your little hot buttons, will not be contained by Obamacare. Look no further than the fraud, waste, and abuse of Medicaid and Medicare. How much of that waste drives up our total medical tab? Add to that defensive medicine to avoid malpractice judgments. Why xray when a PET will keep a doctor from being sued? The third party payer also adds huge cost because people run to the doctor for every little thing because "someone else" is paying for the trip. Maybe the trick there is the single payer bureaucracy and the rationing of treatment to contain costs. I'll take the better access deal with the cost, which is NOT borne by the tax payer un that case. It doesn't matter, the countries with UHC are broke so no matter what the costs are too much for the countries to absorb.
Finally, life expectancy. As the book I linked to stated, when we back out homicides and accidents, the US has the highest life expectancy in the developed world. Damn, those facts are stubborn.
I refer you to the link on infant mortality to shut down your poorly formed and grossly simplistic argument that the lack of UHC worsens our infant mortality rate.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db09.htm
FTA:
Preterm birth has a considerable impact on the U.S. infant mortality rate. The plateau in the U.S. infant mortality rate from 2000 to 2005 is due to an increase in the percentage of infants born preterm (including very preterm and late preterm), together with a lack of decline in the infant mortality rate for very preterm infants. There has also been an increase in the relative impact of preterm-related causes of death. In 2005, 36.5% of infant deaths in the United States were due to preterm-related causes of death, a 5% increase since 2000. The impact of preterm-related causes of death was even higher for non-Hispanic black and Puerto Rican women.
I have no idea why the US is suddenly (since 2000) experiencing a higher rate of preterm birth. Either does the CDC or they would state the cause. So don't go jumping to conclusions since you don't either. It is not like the demographics have changed or access to health care worse now than in the past for low income people.
Anyway, my words, my final thoughts on the subject other than to say that Obamacare is a mistake. It is broke already as this thread's existence demonstrates and it does not solve any of the problems or conditions that you seem to think will be magically wiped away once the good old federal government nationalizes medicine.
how much of our health care "debt" is hidden away in the accounts of medical institutions providing mandatory ER services (written off, and passed on to the rest of us?)
Somehow this cost seems relatively obscured, rather than openly acknowledged as public debt (which is manageable in parts of the EU, unfortunately terribly administered nations drag them all down)
In addition to this obscuring of cost, we are also saddled with the costs of personal bankruptcy.. Can a medical emergency's cost induce a person to bail on ALL their other obligations through bankruptcy?
So your utopian vision of equitable health care is a pipedream. It does not exist in Europe and it does not exist here either. The well-off Europeans do not submit to the waiting lines and rationing. They seek out private pay care. If they need something done electively they come here.
*************
You're stereotyping again, Kick. Some do; most don't. Just as some well-insured (and/or well-heeled) Americans choose to go abroad for elective procedures. The point is: these people have CHOICES. Many uninsured Americans don't----and they're the ones we need to be concerned about.
Incidentally, I never said anything about socialized medicine being a "utopia." That's a word that dishonest right wingers like to toss around, because they fancy that it smacks of communism. (In fact, it smacks much more of St. Thomas More.) But let's get honest, and focus on what I've said, rather than what you wish I'd said, okay?
I realize that socialized medicine has its faults---sometimes you have to wait for that knee replacement you were hoping for, or (this one is always a biggie to right wingers) drive across town for an MRI. But your alternative solution-----leaving 1/6 of Americans WITHOUT any health care plan at all-----is no solution at all. How long do uninsured Americans have to wait for elective surgery, Kick?
And I see once again that you're still avoiding the elephant in the living room----the fact that Americans pay much more per capita for this inequitable system than the residents of any other nation in the world.
As for your arrogant attempt to pooh-pooh my comments about perinatal and infant mortality: I've already pointed out what most OB/GYNs and family practitioners figured out decades ago: a major factor in high rates of premature delivery and/or fetal demise is lack of adequate prenatal care. And, even if you don't care about the tragic aspect of such situations, you might consider that treatment of a life-threatening complication of pregnancy can be very, very expensive. Damage control is usually far more costly than simple prevention.
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3427002.html
And I see once again that you’re still avoiding the elephant in the living room—-the fact that Americans pay much more per capita for this inequitable system than the residents of any other nation in the world.
Actually, I wrote an entire paragraph on cost.
You failed, again, to refute my claims. You employ straw men and you say I'm wrong but offer nothing substantive in reply. You fail to advance your argument, which forces you to have to mischaracterize and use false premises like saying my solution is to leave 1/6 without insurance. That is nonsense. You have ignored huge issues like access even with government insurance. No surprise because you have no answer. Insurance at tax payer expense does not address access does it? BTW, no-one pooh poohed anything. In previous posts I answered your mortality rate canards. The numbers don't tell the story. You know that but you stubbornly cling to your premise despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. In other words, the whole issue is a false flag and has nothing to do with Obamacare or this thread. It is a ploy you used to change the subject after I defeated you on the access question and other points. Funny thing about your link too is that not one word about why there are so many preterm births. Exactly like my CDC link. Therefore you FAILED to draw a connection between UHC and infant mortality. No-one has the answer and the final paragraph say so. Nice try.
Final thought, and I mean it this time, Obamacare will simply be another unfunded liability. How do you overcome that? You've ignored the previously mentioned $100T unfunded entitlement liability. Does that mean you'll ignore Congress raiding the escrow account too? You have so far.
I'm reminded of someone walking away from a mortgage. They enter in at, say 160K. They refinance several times, and get up to 250K during the bubble. During the refinancing, in addition to taking out incentive cash, they fold in several large credit card bills, to the tune of 40K.
2 years of bubble later, they walk away.. They think they are just walking away from house mortgage.. but really they blew off all that credit card debt too
I can imagine someone using a medical-triggered bankruptcy to do the same kind of thing.. They will remember it as a medical emergency, and seek out greater sympathy consequently, while in actuality--declaring bankruptcy--they may happily obtain forgiveness for all manner of non-medical debts
I'm not personally familiar with bankruptcy law, but i can imagine a hazard there.. The mortgage story i've heard over and over though, from friends and co-workers
"I’ve provided information from my professional experience IN health care, Kick, but obviously you’re too insecure to admit that 31 years in the field just might have taught me a few things that you don’t know. Is that why you keep resorting to rude, childish demands and name calling?
Not good enough! This is the Internet, princess, you can be anybody. Show us all you can research and think.
We're done with this topic. You have FAILED again to advance your argument or refute mine. You opinions are meaningless. You are a weak debater.
Let's leave it the others:
Has Olivia advanced her argument?
Has she successfully provided any meaningful rebuttal to my assertions?
No, No
I absorb more medical knowledge listening to my lady and her coworkers than by reading anything posted by my Dear Sweet Olivia. I seem to remember some of our regulars handing her ass to her in medical discussions.
Let’s leave it the others:
Has Olivia advanced her argument?
Has she successfully provided any meaningful rebuttal to my assertions?
no and no
Well, if we're to look at the current funding.... The Health Care bill was the 1%..... Eat the Rich!
Could not resist one more link:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/08/16/whats_scary_about_health_care_reform_97901.html
FTA: In their 2006 book, “The Business of Health,” economists Robert L. Ohsfeldt and John E. Schneider set out to determine where the U.S. would rank in life span among developed nations if homicides and accidents are factored out. Their answer? First place.
http://www.amazon.com/Business-Health-Robert-Ohsfeldt/dp/0844742406
Now I’m done with you.
*********************
OF COURSE you are----because, once again, you're trying to claim that lack of access to affordable health care has NO impact whatsoever on patient outcome. And, as you proved over and over and over again yesterday, you're completely unable to defend this position, because you KNOW that defending such a ridiculous claim would suggest that you think health insurance, regular physical exams and preventive medicine are useless frills.
Which is not only an outrageously ignorant position-----it also defeats the whole right wing purpose on this issue, i.e. sucking up to the insurance industry.
Face it, my boy, you've been caught with your pants down again. And trying to hide behind all the right wing opinion pieces and book reviews in the world isn't going to change that.
Now, which one of you loons is ready to step forward and give up your health insurance ("socialized" or otherwise), to prove that you think Americans can manage just as well without it?
(dead silence)
You read or watched nothing I posted or you would not have posted that mess. You are a coward of the highest order. Had drb not posted just now I never would have seen this. You are a failure as I have consistently posted relevant factual responses to your opinions backed by vapor. You may not agree with them but you damn sure gave failed to discredit them. So why don't you go back and look at the video, read the links, and maybe get through that pile of mush you call a brain that you have no argument.
You lied again and again on this thread. I'm still waiting for the cut and paste where you claim that I said health insurance was a scam and physicals are a waste. Another example of the deluded fantasy world that you live in.
Saying that UHC is affordable means nothing without evidence. Saying that mortality rates are low in the US because of no UHC means nothing without evidence. Sweetheart, it takes a lot more than your say so to convince anyone here that you have the slightest idea what you are talking about. The evidence against those two (misguided) OPINIONS is overwhelming. Of course, that is why you don't directly rebut my challenges and positions. You can't.
You have been OWNED and unless you can demonstrate with links that my assertions are invalid and not with usual your 300 word screeds full of
opinion and fantasy, I invite you to STFU.
You lied again and again on this thread. I’m still waiting for the cut and paste where you claim that I said health insurance was a scam and physicals are a waste.
********************
That's not what I said. You maintained that patient outcome (average life expectancy and infant mortality rate) are NOT affected by lack of health insurance. Well, if you don't believe that those who lack insurance (and, therefore, can't afford routine physicals or preventive maintenance) have poorer outcomes than those who are well insured, then what's the point of having insurance in the first place? Or having regular annual physicals, or routine checkups? Why spend billions per year this particular service, if a "they can always go to the emergency room" health care plan serves Americans just as well?
Of course, you KNOW I'm being satirical. I don't for one minute believe that patient outcome is the same for insured, uninsured and underinsured alike----and, what's more, I don't think you do, either. I think you're trying to excuse your own stinginess and lack of social responsibility, by claiming that the poor don't really need health insurance. But that. my boy, is a crock.
Yesterday, I challenged you anti-reform people (which is essentially everyone here except me) to demonstrate your convictions by giving up your own health insurance. If the "they can always go to the emergency room" health care plan is safe enough for the nation's poor and vulnerable, after all, then it ought to be safe for ALL of us, right?
Of course, there wasn't one single taker.....because everyone here KNOWS that self-treatment-plus-emergency-room is NOT an adequate or reliable or safe longterm health care plan.
But they don't really care that millions of Americans are having to make do with it. They're interested in their own comfort and convenience, not the health or safety of fellow citizens.
Now, spew out your usual denials, and call me a bunch of childish names, as is your wont. But we both know better, don't we?
"That’s not what I said. You maintained that patient outcome (average life expectancy and infant mortality rate) are NOT affected by lack of health insurance"
No. You alleged that the US had a lower mortality rate because of a lack of UHC. I rebutted that with two links. You argued that I said it was a scam and physicals are a waste. You lied. I never said either thing. Your accusation is in a reply to poppajoe.
"Of course, you KNOW I’m being satirical"
No. I know you are backing off your BS. Game, set, and match, Olivia.
" I think you’re trying to excuse your own stinginess and lack of social responsibility, by claiming that the poor don’t really need health insurance. But that. my boy, is a crock."
Don't think Olivia. It never leads to a good end. I have always said that health care issues would be better solved in the free market. The current way is not working and UHC has bankrupted the rest of the world...it is in all the papers. Your last sentence above is a flat out lie and you know it.
"Yesterday, I challenged you anti-reform people (which is essentially everyone here except me) to demonstrate your convictions by giving up your own health insurance. If the “they can always go to the emergency room” health care plan is safe enough for the nation’s poor and vulnerable, after all, then it ought to be safe for ALL of us, right?"
No-one here is anti-reform, another lie. Your "challenge" is stupid. I should give that up? Why? I pay for a large percentage of it, I work hard for my money and benefits, and I give up other things to pay for it. I don't expect freebies like the left does.
"But they don’t really care that millions of Americans are having to make do with it. They’re interested in their own comfort and convenience, not the health or safety of fellow citizens."
Straw man argument. Typical progressive hand wringing. You don't know that to be anything but an empty claim and you certainly have not looked at anything that I have linked to in this thread or you would avoid saying something so stupid.
"Now, spew out your usual denials, and call me a bunch of childish names, as is your wont. But we both know better, don’t we?"
The only spew around here are your endless posts where you consistently fail to discredit or rebut my assertions. Even here, I have taken you apart line by line to illustrate how you lie, mischaracterize and employ straw men. You have failed to advance your argument and you have failed to disprove mine. In short, you are defeated because you don't possess the intellectual courage to be honest in your posts or to look at my (overwhelming) evidence to support my case. This is why we see you as a troll. You simply don't know what you are talking about and you still confuse opinion, fantasy, and lies with actual debate.
"
"
I have always said that health care issues would be better solved in the free market. The current way is not working and UHC has bankrupted the rest of the world…it is in all the papers. Your last sentence above is a flat out lie and you know it.
*******************
Nonsense, my boy. The "free market" is not interested in providing health insurance to people unless they feel it's potentially profitable to do so. That's WHY we have government programs like Medicare and Medicaid. In fact, that's why we have government services, period: because the "free market" wants to be able to pick and choose its customer base. Which will inevitably leave some Americans out in the cold.
Your pat little theory that universal health care has "bankrupted the rest of the world" is, as usual, utter hogwash. How many times does it have to be repeated to sink into your head: WE AMERICANS ARE PAYING FAR MORE PER CAPITA FOR HEALTH CARE THAN RESIDENTS OF ANY OTHER COUNTRY, ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD----YET WE STILL HAVE HUGE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE WHO CAN'T AFFORD TO GO TO THE DOCTOR. How many times does it have to be reiterated: the "they can always go to the emergency room" non-solution, so dear to the hearts of self-centered righties, is MUCH more costly than any routine health maintenance plan.....AND YOU AND I ARE SUBSIDIZING IT, through grossly inflated prices.
Face it: you're parroting the party line, without having the slightest idea what you're talking about. The "free market" has regularly looked for ways to enhance profits, including cancelling unprofitable customers and denying pre-existing conditions, whenever government regulations didn't preclude such practices. That's natural. Businesses are not social workers, and don't care nearly as much about doing the altruistic thing as they do about pleasing their shareholders. And it's very unrealistic of you to assume that they can or will solve our health care crisis.
But at least you're getting a bit more honest now than you were when you insisted that ongoing health care won't affect patient longevity or infant mortality rate. It's a contemptible thing to be selfish, but it's even more contemptible to lie, in order to avoid admitting that your motives behind your position are less than scrupulous.
Olivia unless you want to actually cite something other than your opinions, I'll listen. Until then, shut up. You are a pathetic liar and you have nothing. You say that the EU is not broke due to overwhelming debt caused by too much social spending. I say it is. Prove it isn't. You can't, because that is exactly what every news story about the EU/Euro collapse is talking about. How do you not know that?
Stubbornly ignoring facts is stupid, Olivia, and lying, mischaracterizing, andhitting your talking points with the usual parrotting blah blah, right winger blah blah is not going to get you out of the position of total FAILURE in defending your position or advancing your argument, Olivia.
You need to learn to analyze data rather than mindlessly repeat them. Research why our costs are highest. It won't be what you think and it doesn't matter anyway. Straw man argument again. Are Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Ireland broke? Yes, they are. Why do you suppose that is, Olivia? It is a lot more than my pet theory.
You allow the insurance companies to sell policies across state lines thereby increasing competition, impose loser pays malpractice suits, tort reform in general to minimize defensive medicine (a cost driver), and see if private insurance becomes cheaper. Now since you will disagree, post a link with a counter argument. Your drivel does not interest me.
So, again, please cite SOMETHING other than your opinion to convince me that everything is fine financially in the EU and that their governments are collapsing for no reason. Social programs are all doing great and those pesky riots are only right wing propaganda.
Remember, this whole thread began with Congress raiding the Obamacare escrow account. The program is already a failure. Yet, you will endlessly ramble on insisting everything is fine and ignore this reality. Nevermind that all of the other major entitlement programs have already gone broke. Remember, the link I posted that you didn't open? Yeah, that one with the $100 Trillion dollars in unfunded entitlement liabilities. And let's
just suppose that the US has the highest health care costs....I know it does.....how does Obamacare lower them? You see, it won't otherwise the systems overseas would not be broke nor
would Medicare. So there does not seem to be an answer for that and those high costs are hardly a case for a government takeover of the insurance industry since the government has never ever contained costs.
If costs were going to be lowered, why are we escrowing now for a program that does not kick in until 2014? So much for pay as you go.
Not all EU countries are built the same
Its more like a bad marriage between a spender and a saver.. Sweden's still under 40% debt/GDP ratio if i recall
I long for the days when the U.S. could say the same
This bad marriage punishes the saver. The whole thing was a bad idea from the beginning.
In hindsight there are flaws.. but i don't blame them for trying something to break the cycle of European conflicts (most of us here have ancestry there, and must admit, they were so very good at the warmongering..)
Kick, please stop. I'm laughing so hard that my sides hurt!
I'm picturing Olivia's head exploding while she tries to figure out an answer to the first paragraph alone! By the time she gets through paragraph 3, her brain will be on fire!
Since she just makes shit up as she goes along, it has been easy for her to post replies!
Not so easy when you demand citation.
You lied again and again on this thread. I’m still waiting for the cut and paste where you claim that I said health insurance was a scam and physicals are a waste.
********************
That’s not what I said.
Yes you did...
Olivia November 28, 2011 at 7:15 am
Poorly Rated. Do you Like or Dislike? 0 5
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I can easily respond with a list of horror stories about uninsured patients who died needlessly here in the U.S.
The only reason an uninsured person dies needlessly here is because they don’t seek out medical treatment.
*****************
Actually, that’s untrue, as I see fairly often at work. But, of course, you’re not in the health care profession, and are therefore forced to parrot the right wing propaganda line, since that’s the only “information” you get on this issue.
But, even if what you said WERE true, you’re suggesting that we could do just as well here in the U.S., if we shut down all the doctors’ offices and outpatient clinics, and just had everyone come to the ER when they’re sick. No preventive maintenance; no patient teaching; just emergency damage control.
So why DO the insurance companies cover preventive maintenance, Poopajoe? Are you suggesting, like Sidekick that they’re SCAMMING US, and that going to the doctor for annual physicals is useless? If not, then why are you claiming it isn’t needed?
I'll C/P that last bit once again:
Are you suggesting, like Sidekick that they’re SCAMMING US, and that going to the doctor for annual physicals is useless?
Like shooting libs in a barrel!
Sounds to me like your dodging what Kick has presented...you seem to have completely ignored what he has presented and his direct challenge to you and your assertions. Out of his entire post plus the one that he posted just before this one, the only thing you appear to be responding to is his last sentence..."Now I’m done with you." Everything else looks like an excuse not to read what his links lead to. And why did you post your response so far away from Kick's? Where you hoping he wouldn't see it so that if he failed to respond then you can declare victory in you twisted little mind?
Face it, my boy, you’ve been caught with your pants down again.
She's fantisizing about Kick's avi again...
Olivia-
Who pays you, and is it funded with tax dollars ?
Olivia-
Who pays you, and is it funded with tax dollars ?
********************
My employer (a private hospital) pays me, Paden.
Which state government sends you your monthly checks?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4r6YCUtxfs
Funny stuff drb, except for the 400 years part. Am I getting so old I have forgotten my American history? Probably...lol
no, you are correct...it has not been 400 years yet, but still, i thought it was pretty good.
must've been talkng about the Spanish being in Kansas
Or Columbus?
yeah but Spanish Kansas struck me funny.. i forgot how far Coronado actually explored
I always did lie Jack Webb. and, oh, look, it came subtitled! Thanks Friend.
I’m 16 years away from eligibility, I wonder where we will be in 2027. Who knows?”
One thing I can just about guarantee is that 16 years from now, the carrot will have been moved quite a bit further down the road. I’m 54, and I fully expect to never see anything from either MediCare, or Socialist Insecurity.
****************
Apparently you're not worried about it enough to get into a secure and more lucrative form of employment than renting rides on giant rocking horses.
Well Olivia, I have a retirement plan that you should approve of!
If there is no SSI at the time of my retirement, I will just go on a shooting rampage, killing nurses in Chicago. Then I will get to spend the rest of my life in prison with 3 hots and a cot, cable TV, gym facilities, and a library. I will get all that on the governments dime! I won't have to work and I can spend my last years relaxing and not having to worry about paying bills, feeding myself, and I'll have world class medical care!
Well Olivia, I have a retirement plan that you should approve of!
If there is no SSI at the time of my retirement, I will just go on a shooting rampage, killing nurses in Chicago. Then I will get to spend the rest of my life in prison with 3 hots and a cot, cable TV, gym facilities, and a library. I will get all that on the governments dime! I won’t have to work and I can spend my last years relaxing and not having to worry about paying bills, feeding myself, and I’ll have world class medical care!
*****************************
So what you're saying is that you hope to emulate Richard Speck, also a murderer of Chicago nurses. That says quite a bit about your character, Poopajoe----even if you're supposedly saying this in jest.
Somehow, it's never occurred to me to envy prisoners, as you seem to, or those who have nothing constructive to do with their time. If there's no social security left when I reach retirement age (in fact, that's a hoary old right wing myth, designed to scare the gullible into compliance), I expect I'll just keep on working.
#############################################
.....As unsavory in death as he was in life, mass murderer Richard Speck has come back to haunt the Illinois department of corrections. Last week state legislators packed a hearing room to view a two-hour tape of Speck cavorting with his prison lover. Purportedly filmed in 1988, three years before Speck's death, the tape shows the two inmates snorting cocaine, rolling marijuana joints, brandishing a roll of $100 bills and engaging in oral sex. "If they only knew how much fun I was having," Speck deadpans to the camera, "they would turn me loose......."
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,984604,00.html
"in fact, that’s a hoary old right wing myth, designed to scare the gullible into compliance"
Social Security WILL collapse, as all Ponzi schemes do. It's just a matter of when the feds will stop propping it up, and let it go.
“in fact, that’s a hoary old right wing myth, designed to scare the gullible into compliance”
************************
Social Security WILL collapse, as all Ponzi schemes do.
************************
I just love it when you righties trot out those currently trendy buzzwords, in an effort to back up your position.
"Social security's gonna collapse."
"How do you know that?"
"Why, because it's a Ponzi scheme, and all Ponzi schemes collapse. I heard Rush say so."
"What's a Ponzi scheme?"
"Why----uh----it's one of those crooked schemes that promises a high yield on an investment. But it never pans out, because the promoter absconds with all the funds."
"Social security doesn't promise high yields."
"Yeah, but it's the same thing! Anyway, I don't trust government financial plans. Government shouldn't even be in the investment business. I'd much rather invest my money privately."
"Really?"
"You bet! I'd invest it with this Ponzi firm that's all the rage nowadays. They advertise it all the time on FOX News, so that proves it's honest and reliable."
So how about that $100T unfunded liability that I have now mentioned (with a link) twice to your silence? Again, if you can't see that the social program construct is broken here and overseas, then that speaks poorly of your critical thinking skills. Your snarky post above does not conceal the fact that you continually expose yourself as ignorant.
You've got nerve though, you whine to me about the way I talk to you but you are so much worse to everyone here. Hypocritical - you dish much better than you take. Typical of someone who can't use facts to advance an argument.
Ha! That was a good one, Sidekick. You mentioned critical thinking skills in a post to My Dear Sweet Olivia! You're killin' me!
Even a ponzi scheme could go on forever if you can convince people to keep paying into it
or force them to
Theoretically.
Actually, if you look at the diagram of how a Ponzi scheme works, it can't go on forever. the number of people needed for each successive layer increases, until there just aren't enough people to support it. One good reason they're illegal.
Well, as full as mirth as usual I see, Oblivious!
Don't know who Speck is, don't care. I'm talking about a plan to survive old age. My body is not in the greatest of shape, as decades of hard work are wont to do. By the time I reach 70, I'm sure that working won't be much of an option for me. I already have serious problems with collapsed and bulging discs in my neck, stenosis, scoliosis, sciatica, bursitis, tendonitis, carpal tunnel, and arthritis. I don't think I'll be working into my 70's.
My line of work isn't quite the same as yours, so working past retirement age isn't really an option.
She's gonna go all Wuornos on any non communists as soon as she figures a way to get a gun in the peoples republic of illinois.
Well, as full as mirth as usual I see, Oblivious!
Don’t know who Speck is, don’t care.
*******************
You never heard of Richard Speck?? Suffice it to say that his brutal murder of eight Chicago student nurses, back in the sixties, was a very high profile case across the nation. Not a person most people would care to emulate, even in jest.
*******************
I’m talking about a plan to survive old age. My body is not in the greatest of shape, as decades of hard work are wont to do. By the time I reach 70, I’m sure that working won’t be much of an option for me. I already have serious problems with collapsed and bulging discs in my neck, stenosis, scoliosis, sciatica, bursitis, tendonitis, carpal tunnel, and arthritis. I don’t think I’ll be working into my 70′s.
*********************
But you think these problems would make you well suited to prison life? Strange logic you have there.
*********************
My line of work isn’t quite the same as yours, so working past retirement age isn’t really an option.
*********************
So let's get this straight: you're utterly dependent on GOVERNMENT SOCIAL PROGRAMS to take care of you after you retire----or, failing that, your best option would be incarceration, AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE?
My boy, you've just proved yourself to be a bigger proponent of social programs than most liberals. And that's what makes me laugh so hard at all the pompous pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps homilies from right wingers. When it comes to themselves, they freely admit that sometimes the Bootstrap Method doesn't work, and a bit of socialism is in order...AS LONG AS YOU KEEP IT AWAY FROM THOSE OTHER PEOPLE!!!! ("Those other people" being a coy reference to whichever minority is currently being blamed for the economic situation, the price of broccoli, our deteriorating infrastructure and so on).
(By the way: it's possible that better workplace regulations could have prevented some of those painful conditions you're now stuck with. Just one more reason we liberals fight for such regulations, while the far right battles us every step of the way.)
When you can tell the difference between satire and serious discussion, come back, but until then, I have no further use for you.
BTW, I have been paying into SSI since I was 13 years old. Why would you think that I wouldn't want to recieve my money back? I'm not in the habit of paying for a product or service and saying "That's OK, you can keep the money, I don't really want that".
Yeaaaah, but there's that little thing with the ...well you know, getting "eight balled" in the rec room. Mostly a good plan, but you really need to think it ALL the way through. ;)
No MGAP, they tend to let "Greybeards" alone in prison. There is no pride in screwing with the old guys.
And if you get bored, you can always bring a new lawsuit against the evil system every day, just for entertainment.
And if you get bored, you can always bring a new lawsuit against the evil system every day, just for entertainment.
**************************
.....and see it thrown out, and your attorney reprimanded, if it lacks substance, à la Orly Taitz.
(But I'll bet you didn't know this ever happened, did you? It's so much more gratifying to pretend that all lawsuits result in big winnings for the plaintiff...)
Did I say anything about winning the endless series of lawsuits? How about you do some research and come up with a figure of how much taxpayer money is wasted on the legal libraries for the inmates, and the court costs of handling all these cases. Stop with the straw men, My Dear Sweet Olivia.
Maybe he should've wasted $ 100,000 on a degree in Transgendered / Lesbian Hippo / Pigs Therapy . Or maybe be a gay child rapist therapist to help the many in your world.
I'm not sure what RockingHorseGut does for a living but I'm sure its better than a 3rd generation Democratic pariste Welfare recipient . Too lazy and / or too stupid to work .Remember to you and your kind -- ITS ONLY EVIL IF A CONSERVATIVE DOES IT.
Maybe he should’ve wasted $ 100,000 on a degree in Transgendered / Lesbian Hippo / Pigs Therapy . Or maybe be a gay child rapist therapist to help the many in your world.
I’m not sure what RockingHorseGut does for a living but I’m sure its better than a 3rd generation Democratic pariste Welfare recipient . Too lazy and / or too stupid to work .Remember to you and your kind — ITS ONLY EVIL IF A CONSERVATIVE DOES IT.
*******************
I'm afraid the stupid one is you, Neo, if you haven't yet heard that welfare was reformed in 1996. That means that it's no longer possible to remain on it for three generations, and hasn't been for the last 15 years. It's also a myth that everyone who receives welfare is a Democrat. Poverty is an equal-opportunity problem, and affects people of all (and no) political views.
As for your tiresome comment about "evil," I don't use the term "evil" as lightly as you right wingers. At no point have I stated or implied that it's "evil" not to agree with my political views. Sounds like you're just chock full of stereotypes, and every one of those stereotypes is bogus. ;)
Now, then, if you're ready to discuss, rather than just parroting your favorite prejudices, feel free to start. Otherwise, go parrot your prejudices to someone who's gullible enough to buy into them, okay?
"I’m not sure what RockingHorseGut does for a living but I’m sure its better than a 3rd generation Democratic pariste Welfare recipient."
Hey, easy on the Gut now. I'm working on it. Actually, I had a good exercise routine going for a while, and was losing weight, then I had knee surgery,(paid for by my own insurance), and now I'm getting back to it.
" It’s also a myth that everyone who receives welfare is a Democrat."
Really? Now, why would anyone living on the dole vote for somebody that is going to decrease the dole? Are they even stupider than we thought?
"That means that it’s no longer possible to remain on it for three generations, and hasn’t been for the last 15 years."
Bullshit.
What do I do for a living? Well, I was working pretty steady in Heavy Construction until the Democrats came along and destroyed that industry. Since there is so little work available, I took my retirement early, making it a meager living. I supplement that with my rocking horses and photography. I'm not going to get rich, but I get by.
” It’s also a myth that everyone who receives welfare is a Democrat.”
***********************************
Really? Now, why would anyone living on the dole vote for somebody that is going to decrease the dole? Are they even stupider than we thought?
*********************************
I see plenty of diehard Republicans voting against their own best interest, RHG----or FS----or whatever name you've decided to adopt this week. A lot of them seem to think that what's best for multimillionaires Rush, Dick Cheney and the Bush boys will somehow benefit them, too----even those who, like you, are just getting by.
Then, too, there are a great many people in this country who are apolitical---who have never voted, don't know or care who's running the country, and don't care about the issues. This is a fairly common attitude among the very poor, who are too busy worrying about concrete, up-close-and-personal struggles, like scaring up enough money to get the electricity turned back on, to care what a lot of wealthy politicians in Washington have to say.
**********************
“That means that it’s no longer possible to remain on it for three generations, and hasn’t been for the last 15 years.”
*************************
Bullshit.
*************************
True, nevertheless. Why is it that, when you right wingers b*tch about these fictitious hordes of people allegedly living it up on the taxpayers' dime, your words always seem to have a note of envy in them?
---------------------
What do I do for a living? Well, I was working pretty steady in Heavy Construction until the Democrats came along and destroyed that industry.
****************
It wasn't the Democrats who "destroyed" your job, RHG. It was the lack of consumer demand for your particular skills.
I went through a similar situation when I graduated from college with a teaching degree, and couldn't find a teaching job. But I didn't sit around blaming the Republicans. I was realistic enough to understand that sometimes there aren't enough jobs to go around, not even if you're great at what you do. And I got to work developing a Plan B, which has served me much better.
**********************
Since there is so little work available, I took my retirement early, making it a meager living. I supplement that with my rocking horses and photography. I’m not going to get rich, but I get by.
**************
just so long as the market for your work holds steady, you mean. Nothing is certain in this world----one reason I don't go around blaming the poor and/or insured for their own plight.
"It wasn’t the Democrats who “destroyed” your job, RHG. It was the lack of consumer demand for your particular skills."
And it was Democrat meddling in the housing market that destroyed the consumer demand for my skills.
"True, nevertheless. Why is it that, when you right wingers b*tch about these fictitious hordes of people allegedly living it up on the taxpayers’ dime, your words always seem to have a note of envy in them?"
No, My Dear Sweet Olivia, I have zero envy for the criminals who suck up the income of working people, contributing nothing to society. Wanting the gravy train stopped, so that the country can get back to being productive, has nothing whatsoever to do with envy. Why would you think that it does? I despise these people, and the people in government that enable them. And, of course, the people like you, who vote them in.
Oh, and yeah, i bet my kids would love to ride on those horses.. looks like more fun than a sad elephant at the Shriner's circus (which they loved of course, but just made me want to put a bullet in its head to end its misery)
Its sad that you blame just Dems and not Republicans for that bubble and collapse
The bubble was a gravy train for much more than FMae/FMac... The great majority of sub-prime loans had nothing to do with the CRA. Bubbles are natural market forces, and I'm sorry your industry took it on the chin, but markets get wild and they need a little regulation here and there
I'm not saying speculators should be hanged, or anything.. like they used to be, for reals
Poor Ollie. So well intentioned and so naive as to border on the unbelievable.
All the welfare reforms in 1996 did was change work requirements. The recipiant of our largess, after two continous years on welfare, must get a job working at least 20 hours per week. Even though the welfare patient takes a hit on food stamps and cash equal to the amount of pay, nothing else changes. She, and her current boy-toy, stay in the same subsidized apartment with the same subsidized utility bills. And, she only has to work for 6 months to be elegible for another two year free ride.
This applies to grandma, unless she is drawing Social Security even though she worked very little in her life, to dear old Mom, to the grand daughter and soon to the 4th generation. I'm already seeing 14 and 15 year old girls about ready to pop and they are already on the gravy train.
I keep trying to tell you Olivia, I work in the grocery business in a small town. I deal with these people every day. I know what they get because they brag about it. They even brag about their knocked up teens because it means more "money" for the household. Quit listening to the gooberment spin and listen to those of us who know what is going on because we see it every day. Plus, none of us here would ever steer you wrong.
Sorry for my many misspelling .
" I’m 16 years away from eligibility, I wonder where we will be in 2027. Who knows?"
One thing I can just about guarantee is that 16 years from now, the carrot will have been moved quite a bit further down the road. I'm 54, and I fully expect to never see anything from either MediCare, or Socialist Insecurity.
Oh, so you're right on the dividing line of when the latest projections claim SS will run out of money! From what I have heard, if you're 55 or older, you should have no problem collecting, younger and you can forget seeing a dime.
she's at least 60.
Age or IQ? That was too easy.
both ;)
Don't forget, using her theory of people that pick on the obese are actually obese themselves, then she's also 60 lbs overweight.
I'm few years closer than you and I am begining to wonder if I will see any of my hard earned money returned to me. Socialists like Ollie would say I don't need it since I draw a good retirement, I should leave the tax money I paid for over 40 years in the S.S. fund for those that are too dumb to plan for their future.