Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from TSWFAN. Show TSWFAN's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    White House asks 65 billion for IMF, but there is no money for children to tour the Whitehouse.  I'm sure all the Obama crowd on this board are doing cartwheels. What a despicable person[Obama].

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

    White House asks 65 billion for IMF, but there is no money for children to tour the Whitehouse.  I'm sure all the Obama crowd on this board are doing cartwheels. What a despicable person[Obama].




    I suspect you are a hypocrit. I am not "in" the "Obama crowd" but I see the most rediculous posturing from right wing know nothings in congress such as undermining the security of he US to refusing to let standard judicial appointments be made to undermining the economy. I am not saying that they have NO point to make but that they take their self righteousness, as you seem to, to such decibels that nothing gets done that is NEEDED and all we get is their smug hypocracy. Gee, thanks for hurting America and democracy in order to feed your self righteousness.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to thehub's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    In response to thehub's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    In response to thehub's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    Hub . . . the Obama plan seems to me to focus on expanding coverage (something which does need to be done, I believe), but I don't see how it controls underlying costs.  That's where I think the Obama plan falls short.  Controlling costs, though, is a bit difficult without going to a more government-controlled system like most other advanced countries have.  That was politically unpopular in the US, though, so I'm not sure the Democrats could have gotten such a bill through Congress (and Obama didn't push for such a bill either--probably not wanting to commit political suicide). 

    Personally, having lived in both the US (my native country) and in a country that has government-provided health care (Canada), I think there are lots of pluses to government-provided health care.  No system is perfect, but controlling costs in a private sector system seems pretty hard to do.  When the government controls things, they can force prices down.  Despite what you read in the American press, healthcare here in Canada (or at least in Ontario, since each Province has its own plan) is pretty good, wait times are reasonable for most services (actually shorter than I experienced when I lived in Massachusetts), and costs are much, much lower.  Plus everyone is covered.  The system works pretty well, actually.  I don't quite understand why Americans fear a government-controlled system so much.  My experience with that kind of system in Ontario has been quite positive.  I also was quite impressed with how well the healthcare system in Paris (France, not Ontario) worked when I got sick while visiting.  I actually had a doctor and a lab technician make a "house call" to my hotel room!

     

     



    Good post prolate,

     

    I won't prtend to know a lot about Canada and thier delivery system and we do need some cost control here. However, it's very upsetting that this massive bill misses the mark on many levels.

    You are right about access and rates. We had access and laws that help the uninsurred what we did not have and will not get is affordable healthcare. My thought was to dissmantle the group market all together and lets us all buy an individual policy based on age, tabacco use and gender. The policy would be GI (guaranteed issued) so eveyone could pruchase one. Have the insurance capped at say 150K and Uncle Sam insure the back end risk. This will drive down the cost as the carriers rick would be limited to max limit. Perhaps toss the wellness vists on Uncle Sam as well and make sure we all get our yearly check up. Lets catch the issues before they become issues.

    _

     

     



     

    Interesting idea to have some portion of the risk insured by private carriers and the rest covered by the government.  I'm curious about your idea for dismantling the group market--if anything, there's been a desire to increase the number of people who can be covered through group plans.  (Generally, coverage can be provided more cheaply through group purchasing arrangements.)  What do you think would be the advantage of getting rid of group plans?

     

     



    The thought that group insurance is cheaper is not always true. Size does not matter as much as one would think. I help clients secure coverage and the rates for my smaller groups are many times cheaper than my larger groups. With a mandate and GI then the pool will take care of size for those that think it matters. What matters is health........ Good health! 

     

    My ind rates for my family is less than $400 per month. For the same plan my groups pay over $1500 again for the plan. Why? The regualtions drive up the rates. 

    My idea would be put me out of business but its the right thing to do. Why should your boss decide your insurance carrier? Your network of doctors? Why should the claims of your co workers have an impact on your rates? 

     



    Interesting.  I've mostly read that group rates are lower and individual plans are more expensive, but you're right that what really matters is the size and health of the underlying risk pool.

     

    I don't like the employer-based system we have in the states.  I think it's expensive for companies (and puts them at a competitive disadvantage against companies in countries where healthcare is government funded), plus as you say it means individuals are at the mercy of their employer (and employment status) for choosing and even having coverage.  

    Rates though are going to be determined in large part by the health of others in the risk pool whether you're in  a group plan or an individual plan, so you really can't avoid the claims of others affecting your own rates.  You can, of course, have different rates based on health status, but that tends to make coverage unaffordable for old and sick people (GI by itself doesn't solve the issue unless rates are controlled). There are other factors that affect rates--coverage provisions and administrative efficiency--but health status (and resulting claims cost) is the biggest factor.

     



    The ind market won't tie me to my group plan of 50 employees that do not care to care their health. No easy answers for sure. We need reform in a big way. Lets shake it up and take the pressure off the business owners. I know we agree on that. Why is auto insurance rate not rising by 15% per year? We do demand the provider to cover things that breaks and we have a deductible before the carries pay the claim. Oil changes, wiper blades, gas etc. All on the consumer. Healthcare, pays everything for a copay. We are blind tho the real cost and cant be apart of the solution. 

     

    Good back and forth with you. Thanks. I will check in again later. 

     

    _______

     Yeah Hub, it's nice to have a discussion on an issue that doesn't involve yelling and name-calling.  Thanks . . . If only our Congressmen and women could do the same!

     

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from TSWFAN. Show TSWFAN's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

    White House asks 65 billion for IMF, but there is no money for children to tour the Whitehouse.  I'm sure all the Obama crowd on this board are doing cartwheels. What a despicable person[Obama].

     




    I suspect you are a hypocrit. I am not "in" the "Obama crowd" but I see the most rediculous posturing from right wing know nothings in congress such as undermining the security of he US to refusing to let standard judicial appointments be made to undermining the economy. I am not saying that they have NO point to make but that they take their self righteousness, as you seem to, to such decibels that nothing gets done that is NEEDED and all we get is their smug hypocracy. Gee, thanks for hurting America and democracy in order to feed your self righteousness.

     

     



    just stating a fact and my opinion about Obama. Obama is undermining the economy with his refusal to approve the XL pipeline; making 3 illegal [recess] appointments to the NLRB; trying to punish the public with the Sequester implimentation; etc. Those are facts  are they not?   The economy as measured by the GDP has gone down 3 years in row under his administration. The worse recovery in history. You have eyes, can you not see? Self righteousness/ hipocracy has nothing to do with it. Obama is a congential liar and I can provide a few his lies for your edification if need be.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

     

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

    White House asks 65 billion for IMF, but there is no money for children to tour the Whitehouse.  I'm sure all the Obama crowd on this board are doing cartwheels. What a despicable person[Obama].

     




    I suspect you are a hypocrit. I am not "in" the "Obama crowd" but I see the most rediculous posturing from right wing know nothings in congress such as undermining the security of he US to refusing to let standard judicial appointments be made to undermining the economy. I am not saying that they have NO point to make but that they take their self righteousness, as you seem to, to such decibels that nothing gets done that is NEEDED and all we get is their smug hypocracy. Gee, thanks for hurting America and democracy in order to feed your self righteousness.

     

     

     



    just stating a fact and my opinion about Obama. Obama is undermining the economy with his refusal to approve the XL pipeline; making 3 illegal [recess] appointments to the NLRB; trying to punish the public with the Sequester implimentation; etc. Those are facts  are they not?   The economy as measured by the GDP has gone down 3 years in row under his administration. The worse recovery in history. You have eyes, can you not see? Self righteousness/ hipocracy has nothing to do with it. Obama is a congential liar and I can provide a few his lies for your edification if need be.

     

     



    You'd be more credible if you had your facts right.  GDP has not declined three years in a row.  It declined between 2008 and 2009 with the recession, but has grown each year since. Kind of ironic to be calling Obama a liar when you're saying things that aren't true yourself . . .

    Also, the fact that Keystone XL is not yet approved is not undermining the economy . . . Obama is just being responsible and waiting for the environmental assessments to be completed.  I'd say the odds are that he'll approve rather than reject.  And every president in recent years has made recess appointments like Obama's.  They've never been challenged in the courts before . . . but Bush and Clinton both did exactly the same thing.  We're you so alarmed when Bush did it?  I doubt it.  Fox News or Rush Limbaugh or whoever tells you what to think didn't seem to worry about it when Bush did it . . . but when Obama does it, it's the end of the world. Absolute lack of integrity.  I guess though it's to be expected, sadly, from the world of dittoheads . . . 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    Thanks, TheHub and Prolate, for an intelligent and helpful discussion on a very complex issue.  It was most refreshing to read a respectful, knowledgeable exchange between two contributors. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from TSWFAN. Show TSWFAN's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

     

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

    White House asks 65 billion for IMF, but there is no money for children to tour the Whitehouse.  I'm sure all the Obama crowd on this board are doing cartwheels. What a despicable person[Obama].

     




    I suspect you are a hypocrit. I am not "in" the "Obama crowd" but I see the most rediculous posturing from right wing know nothings in congress such as undermining the security of he US to refusing to let standard judicial appointments be made to undermining the economy. I am not saying that they have NO point to make but that they take their self righteousness, as you seem to, to such decibels that nothing gets done that is NEEDED and all we get is their smug hypocracy. Gee, thanks for hurting America and democracy in order to feed your self righteousness.

     

     

     



    just stating a fact and my opinion about Obama. Obama is undermining the economy with his refusal to approve the XL pipeline; making 3 illegal [recess] appointments to the NLRB; trying to punish the public with the Sequester implimentation; etc. Those are facts  are they not?   The economy as measured by the GDP has gone down 3 years in row under his administration. The worse recovery in history. You have eyes, can you not see? Self righteousness/ hipocracy has nothing to do with it. Obama is a congential liar and I can provide a few his lies for your edification if need be.

     

     



    You'd be more credible if you had your facts right.  GDP has not declined three years in a row.  It declined between 2008 and 2009 with the recession, but has grown each year since. Kind of ironic to be calling Obama a liar when you're saying things that aren't true yourself . . .

    Also, the fact that Keystone XL is not yet approved is not undermining the economy . . . Obama is just being responsible and waiting for the environmental assessments to be completed.  I'd say the odds are that he'll approve rather than reject.  And every president in recent years has made recess appointments like Obama's.  They've never been challenged in the courts before . . . but Bush and Clinton both did exactly the same thing.  We're you so alarmed when Bush did it?  I doubt it.  Fox News or Rush Limbaugh or whoever tells you what to think didn't seem to worry about it when Bush did it . . . but when Obama does it, it's the end of the world. Absolute lack of integrity.  I guess though it's to be expected, sadly, from the world of dittoheads . . . 




    GDP: 2009, -3.5%;2010, 2.9%; 2011,1.8%; 2012,2.2%. I was wrong on the 3 years it was 2 years after about a trillion in stimulus spending. The Senate was in session when Obama made his "recess appointments" and Appeals Court has so ruled.  The Pipeline is Obama kissing up to the Greens. He has already said he wants $7-8 gasoline. I have provided facts. You have provided opinion backed by blather including insulting my intelligence and integrity that is typical of Obamites.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

    GDP: 2009, -3.5%;2010, 2.9%; 2011,1.8%; 2012,2.2%. I was wrong on the 3 years it was 2 years after about a trillion in stimulus spending. The Senate was in session when Obama made his "recess appointments" and Appeals Court has so ruled.  The Pipeline is Obama kissing up to the Greens. He has already said he wants $7-8 gasoline. I have provided facts. You have provided opinion backed by blather including insulting my intelligence and integrity that is typical of Obamites.

     



    So you admit you were wrong about the GDP.  Now why don't you go off and try to find where Obama said he wanted gasoline to cost $7 to $8 per gallon?  You'll find out once again that the "facts" you provided aren't really "facts."  

     

    Again, you're accusing Obama of being a "congenital liar," but if someone is repeating untruths, it seems to be you.  You may not be a liar, but if you're not, then you're just ill-informed. Either way, your arguments aren't very convincing. 

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to RidingWithTheKing's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    Hah!  I see, you have no argument.  You can shout "more complex, more complex" and type "LOL" till you're blue in the face, but it explains absolutely nothing about why the US can't have government paid health care and most other advanced nations can.  You actually sound just like the guys who argue incessantly that gun control won't work in the US because the US is  . . . well, different. 

    Lame.  Completely and utterly lame. 

     




    How is it lame that we have much bigger issues to deal with than Canada does as a country, which hence, makes our country more complex?

     

    I've never heard an educated adult contest the fact that the US is more complex than Canada. Leave it to Prolate to play contrarian just to try to showcase some kind of Canadian superiority. 

    Bigger population, bigger problems, more problems, etc.  How is this even debatable? Do you have illegals rushing the Canadian border on both sides like we do? Nope, didn't think so. That's for starters.

     



    You still haven't said a word about why government-funded healthcare won't work in the US because the US is more "complex" than Canada (and the UK and all the other countries that have government funded healthcare).  How does "complexity" make it impossible, for instance, to expand Medicare to cover all citizens rather than just the elderly?  

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    So you admit you were wrong about the GDP.  Now why don't you go off and try to find where Obama said he wanted gasoline to cost $7 to $8 per gallon?  You'll find out once again that the "facts" you provided aren't really "facts."  

     

    Again, you're accusing Obama of being a "congenital liar," but if someone is repeating untruths, it seems to be you.  You may not be a liar, but if you're not, then you're just ill-informed. Either way, your arguments aren't very convincing. 



    Don't bother with this guy prolate.  He is a "true believer".  Nothing you say will change his mind.  He'll just continue to respond with "facts" which are basically Fox News talking points that have pretty much been debunked one million times.  I wonder if he still believes Obama was born in Kenya?

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     

    So you admit you were wrong about the GDP.  Now why don't you go off and try to find where Obama said he wanted gasoline to cost $7 to $8 per gallon?  You'll find out once again that the "facts" you provided aren't really "facts."  

     

    Again, you're accusing Obama of being a "congenital liar," but if someone is repeating untruths, it seems to be you.  You may not be a liar, but if you're not, then you're just ill-informed. Either way, your arguments aren't very convincing. 

     



    Don't bother with this guy prolate.  He is a "true believer".  Nothing you say will change his mind.  He'll just continue to respond with "facts" which are basically Fox News talking points that have pretty much been debunked one million times.  I wonder if he still believes Obama was born in Kenya?

     



    Oh, I know the type.  I'm just sick of Americans suffering these fools gently. They're bad for the country and someone should call them on it. It's fine to oppose Obama's policies (there are many I oppose myself), but in a democracy the people have a responsibility to understand the issues and make decisions based on facts and reason.  We're far too tolerant of ignorance, I think, and  I'm sick of it because it's dragging the country down for everyone.  

     

     

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from thehub. Show thehub's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to RidingWithTheKing's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    In response to RidingWithTheKing's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    Hah!  I see, you have no argument.  You can shout "more complex, more complex" and type "LOL" till you're blue in the face, but it explains absolutely nothing about why the US can't have government paid health care and most other advanced nations can.  You actually sound just like the guys who argue incessantly that gun control won't work in the US because the US is  . . . well, different. 

    Lame.  Completely and utterly lame. 

     




    How is it lame that we have much bigger issues to deal with than Canada does as a country, which hence, makes our country more complex?

     

    I've never heard an educated adult contest the fact that the US is more complex than Canada. Leave it to Prolate to play contrarian just to try to showcase some kind of Canadian superiority. 

    Bigger population, bigger problems, more problems, etc.  How is this even debatable? Do you have illegals rushing the Canadian border on both sides like we do? Nope, didn't think so. That's for starters.

     

     



    You still haven't said a word about why government-funded healthcare won't work in the US because the US is more "complex" than Canada (and the UK and all the other countries that have government funded healthcare).  How does "complexity" make it impossible, for instance, to expand Medicare to cover all citizens rather than just the elderly?  

     

     




    I said it would work above, dude. I just said it's going to take soem time to see the benefits of it because our country is more complex.   This is where you apparently took umbrage, so that's on you.

     

    Dude, my sister is a doctor. She knows a lot more about this than you or me. She's given me more info and knowled on the topic than I would have had from some doctor or insurance lobbyist dropping spin and rhetoric out there as he has his hand out for money to do so. 

    I am in healthcare/medical field, and not anywhere near her level of understanding why this is so complex for Americans, but not acknowledging it is a very complex issue for a very complex country right now is delusional.

    I feel we need to start somewhere which is what I wrote above.  To me it's pathetic we put more stock into car insurance than health insurance.

    A car is a luxury, health is not.  You could be in a hospital bed with your car being fixed for free (w/insurance) with thosuands in hospital bills because you don't have insurance. Makes no sense. Never did.

    It's the same concept. Everyone pays into it to keep costs down, long term.  I don't buy into this quality argument either. Our country will build more hospitals, treatment cetners and import more doctors and nurses, etc, to deal with demand. Supply and demand.

    TSWFWN or whatever his name is, lacks knowledge on the topic and likely is one of these pissing in the wind types that thinks basic human needs are only for him and the priveleged, screw everyone else kind of concept.

    They offer no counter solutuons to the problem, but just repeat rhetoric instlled with fear, hoping it sticks to the wall. It's Tea Party/Extreme Right Wing concepts 101.

     



    Rusty,

     

    what would be your solution to the issue of controlling HC cost? What are the big issues we face in the states? 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to RidingWithTheKing's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    In response to RidingWithTheKing's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    Hah!  I see, you have no argument.  You can shout "more complex, more complex" and type "LOL" till you're blue in the face, but it explains absolutely nothing about why the US can't have government paid health care and most other advanced nations can.  You actually sound just like the guys who argue incessantly that gun control won't work in the US because the US is  . . . well, different. 

    Lame.  Completely and utterly lame. 

     




    How is it lame that we have much bigger issues to deal with than Canada does as a country, which hence, makes our country more complex?

     

    I've never heard an educated adult contest the fact that the US is more complex than Canada. Leave it to Prolate to play contrarian just to try to showcase some kind of Canadian superiority. 

    Bigger population, bigger problems, more problems, etc.  How is this even debatable? Do you have illegals rushing the Canadian border on both sides like we do? Nope, didn't think so. That's for starters.

     

     



    You still haven't said a word about why government-funded healthcare won't work in the US because the US is more "complex" than Canada (and the UK and all the other countries that have government funded healthcare).  How does "complexity" make it impossible, for instance, to expand Medicare to cover all citizens rather than just the elderly?  

     

     




    I said it would work above, dude. I just said it's going to take soem time to see the benefits of it because our country is more complex.   This is where you apparently took umbrage, so that's on you.

     

    Dude, my sister is a doctor. She knows a lot more about this than you or me. She's given me more info and knowled on the topic than I would have had from some doctor or insurance lobbyist dropping spin and rhetoric out there as he has his hand out for money to do so. 

    I am in healthcare/medical field, and not anywhere near her level of understanding why this is so complex for Americans, but not acknowledging it is a very complex issue for a very complex country right now is delusional.

    I feel we need to start somewhere which is what I wrote above.  To me it's pathetic we put more stock into car insurance than health insurance.

    A car is a luxury, health is not.  You could be in a hospital bed with your car being fixed for free (w/insurance) with thosuands in hospital bills because you don't have insurance. Makes no sense. Never did.

    It's the same concept. Everyone pays into it to keep costs down, long term.  I don't buy into this quality argument either. Our country will build more hospitals, treatment cetners and import more doctors and nurses, etc, to deal with demand. Supply and demand.

    TSWFWN or whatever his name is, lacks knowledge on the topic and likely is one of these pissing in the wind types that thinks basic human needs are only for him and the priveleged, screw everyone else kind of concept.

    They offer no counter solutuons to the problem, but just repeat rhetoric instlled with fear, hoping it sticks to the wall. It's Tea Party/Extreme Right Wing concepts 101.

     



    Really? Everyone pays into it, or will pay into it? Does everyone pay into it equally? How about all of the 'undocumented' individuals who use these resources (estimated at 30 million now, or almost 10% of our nations population)? And does everyone bear the same equal responsibility toward helping keep costs down? I don't smoke, I try to eat fairly healthy (although I'll admit I fail at this more than I'd like), I drink only occassionally, I don't take any 'recreational' drugs and use over the counter medications at a minimum, and I go the the gym 5-6 times a week (Planet Fitness, it is only $10/month, so don't use the not everyone can afford a health club membership arguement, it costs less that taking a kid to McDonalds once). I have not taken a sick day from work in over 15 months, and I do everything I can to try to keep myself healthy, and I have tried to instill these same beliefs into my children. And yet because I have what most of you would consider a pretty good, well paying job, my taxes will go up to cover the costs of a large number of individuals who refuse accept personal responsiblility, and who make very bad life choices about their own personal health. How many people smoke 2 packs a day, or drink a 12 pack or more every night, or take their familiy out to McDonalds 3-4 times a week, or use crack, or snort coke, or inject heroin, polluting their bodies and minds, or run to the emergency room for every minor issue. There is a huge difference between being healthy and having health insurance. This country needs a health policy more than it needs health care reform.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In the US, the per-capita cost of healthcare is over $8,000, while in most other advanced nations it's between $3,000 and $5,000.  I think the basic reason for that is that market forces don't really work well when it comes to health spending, which means a market-based system like that in the US is not good at controlling costs.  This is unusual because markets usually work better than governments when setting costs, but health care is unusual for many reasons.  Most important, people are not likely to weigh the costs and benefits of spending on health care when the possible result of not spending enough is your own death or the death of a loved one.  The risk is too big to make the choice of foregoing care a rational one.  In addition, health care consumers generally don't have the knowledge to know what they really need and therefore are completely dependent on the "seller" (the doctor) to tell them what to buy.  Add to that that the fact that the seller has lots of reasons to sell more (in some cases a financial interest, but more often just not wanting to take the risk of making a mistake), that most care is paid for through insurance and therefore the buyer has no reason to reduce expenditures once the insurance is paid for, and that most insurance is paid for by a third party, and you see that there just isn't a lot of incentive for costs to be reduced in a system like the US's.  

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to RidingWithTheKing's comment:

     

    I said it would work above, dude. I just said it's going to take soem time to see the benefits of it because our country is more complex.   This is where you apparently took umbrage, so that's on you.


    Here's where I'd agree with you Rusty.  I think the transition from the current system to a government one would be very complex (and probably very disruptive) in the US because the private system is so deeply entrenched and so many businesses have a stake in continuing it.  That has nothing to do with complexity because of differences in population . . . but it does mean a more complex transition.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to RidingWithTheKing's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    In response to RidingWithTheKing's comment:

     

     

    I said it would work above, dude. I just said it's going to take soem time to see the benefits of it because our country is more complex.   This is where you apparently took umbrage, so that's on you.

     

     


    Here's where I'd agree with you Rusty.  I think the transition from the current system to a government one would be very complex (and probably very disruptive) in the US because the private system is so deeply entrenched and so many businesses have a stake in continuing it.  That has nothing to do with complexity because of differences in population . . . but it does mean a more complex transition.

     



    That's correct.  We have more going on here/more crap to deal with here than Canada or Sweden. That's the point.

     

    Think about like this:

     

     

     

    The Plinko chip that slides right down quickly AND into the $10,000 slot is the healthcare system working in Canada or Sweden.

    The Plinko chip that slides down, taking a long time and hits on the $100 slot is our situation here in the US.




     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    Part of the problem is that the UK made the transition in the 40s and Canada in the 60s.  The US is late to the game and now has a huge for-profit industry built up around healthcare which can't be dismantled without a lot of pain.  The attractiveness of the Romney-Obama approach is that it leaves all that private sector infrastructure in place, which makes change easier. The question, though, is whether costs can really come down without government (rather than a market) setting rates.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TSWFAN. Show TSWFAN's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

    GDP: 2009, -3.5%;2010, 2.9%; 2011,1.8%; 2012,2.2%. I was wrong on the 3 years it was 2 years after about a trillion in stimulus spending. The Senate was in session when Obama made his "recess appointments" and Appeals Court has so ruled.  The Pipeline is Obama kissing up to the Greens. He has already said he wants $7-8 gasoline. I have provided facts. You have provided opinion backed by blather including insulting my intelligence and integrity that is typical of Obamites.

     



    So you admit you were wrong about the GDP.  Now why don't you go off and try to find where Obama said he wanted gasoline to cost $7 to $8 per gallon?  You'll find out once again that the "facts" you provided aren't really "facts."  

     

    Again, you're accusing Obama of being a "congenital liar," but if someone is repeating untruths, it seems to be you.  You may not be a liar, but if you're not, then you're just ill-informed. Either way, your arguments aren't very convincing. 



    Instead of addressing the facts I presented you come with more blather. Present facts contradicting those that I presented regarding the appointments to the NLRB,the sequester pain he wants to inflict on the country; the slower than normal economic recovery; his expressed desire for $7-8 gasoline; his comment about those "people that cling to their guns and religion";his promise to cut the federal debt by 1/2 before he left office; etc. Either bring or skulk off and be quiet.

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from TSWFAN. Show TSWFAN's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    Hey king ... you are the boy who is always pissin in the wind. The wind is always eminating from your blow hole and it stinks too.

    Try conducting a poll on why you are the most despised person on this board.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Happy Sequester Everyone!!!

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

    GDP: 2009, -3.5%;2010, 2.9%; 2011,1.8%; 2012,2.2%. I was wrong on the 3 years it was 2 years after about a trillion in stimulus spending. The Senate was in session when Obama made his "recess appointments" and Appeals Court has so ruled.  The Pipeline is Obama kissing up to the Greens. He has already said he wants $7-8 gasoline. I have provided facts. You have provided opinion backed by blather including insulting my intelligence and integrity that is typical of Obamites.

     



    So you admit you were wrong about the GDP.  Now why don't you go off and try to find where Obama said he wanted gasoline to cost $7 to $8 per gallon?  You'll find out once again that the "facts" you provided aren't really "facts."  

     

    Again, you're accusing Obama of being a "congenital liar," but if someone is repeating untruths, it seems to be you.  You may not be a liar, but if you're not, then you're just ill-informed. Either way, your arguments aren't very convincing. 

     



    Instead of addressing the facts I presented you come with more blather. Present facts contradicting those that I presented regarding the appointments to the NLRB,the sequester pain he wants to inflict on the country; the slower than normal economic recovery; his expressed desire for $7-8 gasoline; his comment about those "people that cling to their guns and religion";his promise to cut the federal debt by 1/2 before he left office; etc. Either bring or skulk off and be quiet.

     

     

     



    Please, just provide some proof of your claim that he said he wants gas prices to increase to $7 to $8 per gallon. You say you are presenting facts, but you're not. I find no reference at all to Obama ever saying he wanted gas prices to rise that high. If he did, prove it. If you can't prove it, then please don't tell me you're stating facts when all you're doing is repeating unsubstantiated right-wing talking points.

     

     

     

Share