Page 5 of 81 FirstFirst 1234567891555 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 1612

Thread: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

  1. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    LOL at Universal Health Care cutting down US healthcare costs.

    No.

    The main cost of US healthcare comes from tests and procedures. The left likes to push the myth that cutting out the insurance middleman will produce huge savings, but that's a drop in the bucket compared to what is actually paid to medical providers, hospitals, and test facilities.

    What aboug Big Pharma? That's some of the problem, but not the main part of it. The pharmaceutical cost can be brought under control far more easily than the cost of the rest of US healthcare. Simply introduce the ability to order pharmaceuticals from other first world countries, and the prices in the US will plummet.

    Healthcare in the US is so expensive for various reasons:

    1) The pricing model is opaque. The patient has no idea what services he's buying (or what they cost) until after he has them, and receives a bill. Furthermore, in the cases where insurance pays all or most of the bill, the patient doesn't care about the cost anyway.

    2) There are no free market forces at work. Doctors and facilities are for what they do, not how well they do it. There is little financial incentive for a doctor to do a good job, but big financial incentives to see large numbers of patients and creatively bill for as many expensive things as possible.

    3) The pricing model is driven by Medicare. That's the benchmark insurance companies use to set "allowed rates", which dictates how much they will pay (and how much in-network patients will be responsible for). Unfortunately, thanks to lobbying and corruption, some Medicare rates are artificially inflated, and that drives the health care industry to push for those test/procedures to be done. A good example is the Nuclear Stress Test in cardiology, which is usually unnecessary (and not good for the patient), but usually prescribed instead of the regular Echo Stress Test, because the Nuclear one costs so much more.

    What will socialized medicine do?

    It will simply shift the bill to the government, with all the same existing problems. But even worse, with all tests/procedures being "free", utilization will go way up, and the net cost will be more.

    Neither party has approached this healthcare fiasco properly. If something reasonable is not put in place soon, then yes, socialized medicine will be in our future -- at least until that is a spectacular failure and it's rolled back.

    How come socialized medicine works in other countries? First off, there's lots of debate as to how well it actually works, but I will concede that cost-wise, other first world countries spend far less per capita on their socialized healthcare systems.

    But that's simply because they don't have all of these horrible price structures in place like the US does, and these wouldn't be dismantled if and when socialized medicine comes to the US. Comparing the US cost to, say, England or Australia, is a apples-to-oranges comparison.

    Right now, what we need is a complete restructuring of the way medical services are sold.

    The following would roughly accomplish this (and I've said it before, btw):

    1) Completely reform the billing system, removing a lot of the hidden charges which turn into "gotchas" for patients. For example, if you go to the doctor for a checkup or examination due to a health concern, the doctor can only bill for the examination, and not for equipment he uses to examine you, or because you mentioned other problems while at the office. Most importantly, a written estimate must be provided to the patient prior to treatment/examination, which will indicate his out-of-pocket cost, and the patient must sign it. This, of course, would be waived in the case of extreme emergency.

    2) Do away with the "preferred provider" model with health insurance. Instead, make health insurance pay for any doctor and any facility, but with a (relatively low) cap on the amount paid for each billable item. Doctors can charge what they want (but must disclose it to the patient before treatment), and the free market will take care of the rest. For example, let's say you want a checkup. Your insurance will pay $60 for it. You can go to a top doctor who might charge $200 for it (meaning you'll pay $140 out of pocket), or you can go to a lower-tier doctor who just charges the $60, thus making the visit "free".

    3) Based upon income, the government can provide relief for health insurance premiums or certain out-of-pocket expenses. So the guy making $14,000 per year will still be able to get treated even if he is living from hand to mouth.

    4) Sicker people will pay higher premiums than healthy people, with a subsidy from the government at a certain point if those premiums cannot be afforded. Nobody will be denied insurance based upon health condition.

    5) End group insurance. The entire group insurance model is antiquated, and hails from a time when people tended to work for one company for most of their life, and the company would almost act as a parental figure. That's how company-provided healthcare was born. However, today's economy is far different, and now the burden of providing healthcare has fallen into the laps of today's corporations. It is highly inefficient, unfairly favors the older people, and is a huge profit center for insurance companies. (For example, if you're a healthy 35-year-old, you'd be SHOCKED what your company is paying for your healthcare coverage -- money which could otherwise be used for your salary!) Replace the group insurance with the company simply paying the employees' individual insurance premiums.

    Implement the above, and we will save a ton of money, while not denying anyone care. You'll be shocked how quickly the costs come down once the free market takes hold.
    a lot of what you're proposing here is basically obamacare, and kind of socialist

    i'm not disagreeing with you. just saying

     
    Comments
      
      MumblesBadly: Onamacsre = national Romneycare = Original GOP counter to “socialized medicine”

  2. #82
    Gold MrTickle's Avatar
    Reputation
    414
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    1,670
    Quote Originally Posted by verminaard View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    LOL at Universal Health Care cutting down US healthcare costs.

    No.

    The main cost of US healthcare comes from tests and procedures. The left likes to push the myth that cutting out the insurance middleman will produce huge savings, but that's a drop in the bucket compared to what is actually paid to medical providers, hospitals, and test facilities.

    What aboug Big Pharma? That's some of the problem, but not the main part of it. The pharmaceutical cost can be brought under control far more easily than the cost of the rest of US healthcare. Simply introduce the ability to order pharmaceuticals from other first world countries, and the prices in the US will plummet.

    Healthcare in the US is so expensive for various reasons:

    1) The pricing model is opaque. The patient has no idea what services he's buying (or what they cost) until after he has them, and receives a bill. Furthermore, in the cases where insurance pays all or most of the bill, the patient doesn't care about the cost anyway.

    2) There are no free market forces at work. Doctors and facilities are for what they do, not how well they do it. There is little financial incentive for a doctor to do a good job, but big financial incentives to see large numbers of patients and creatively bill for as many expensive things as possible.

    3) The pricing model is driven by Medicare. That's the benchmark insurance companies use to set "allowed rates", which dictates how much they will pay (and how much in-network patients will be responsible for). Unfortunately, thanks to lobbying and corruption, some Medicare rates are artificially inflated, and that drives the health care industry to push for those test/procedures to be done. A good example is the Nuclear Stress Test in cardiology, which is usually unnecessary (and not good for the patient), but usually prescribed instead of the regular Echo Stress Test, because the Nuclear one costs so much more.

    What will socialized medicine do?

    It will simply shift the bill to the government, with all the same existing problems. But even worse, with all tests/procedures being "free", utilization will go way up, and the net cost will be more.

    Neither party has approached this healthcare fiasco properly. If something reasonable is not put in place soon, then yes, socialized medicine will be in our future -- at least until that is a spectacular failure and it's rolled back.

    How come socialized medicine works in other countries? First off, there's lots of debate as to how well it actually works, but I will concede that cost-wise, other first world countries spend far less per capita on their socialized healthcare systems.

    But that's simply because they don't have all of these horrible price structures in place like the US does, and these wouldn't be dismantled if and when socialized medicine comes to the US. Comparing the US cost to, say, England or Australia, is a apples-to-oranges comparison.

    Right now, what we need is a complete restructuring of the way medical services are sold.

    The following would roughly accomplish this (and I've said it before, btw):

    1) Completely reform the billing system, removing a lot of the hidden charges which turn into "gotchas" for patients. For example, if you go to the doctor for a checkup or examination due to a health concern, the doctor can only bill for the examination, and not for equipment he uses to examine you, or because you mentioned other problems while at the office. Most importantly, a written estimate must be provided to the patient prior to treatment/examination, which will indicate his out-of-pocket cost, and the patient must sign it. This, of course, would be waived in the case of extreme emergency.

    2) Do away with the "preferred provider" model with health insurance. Instead, make health insurance pay for any doctor and any facility, but with a (relatively low) cap on the amount paid for each billable item. Doctors can charge what they want (but must disclose it to the patient before treatment), and the free market will take care of the rest. For example, let's say you want a checkup. Your insurance will pay $60 for it. You can go to a top doctor who might charge $200 for it (meaning you'll pay $140 out of pocket), or you can go to a lower-tier doctor who just charges the $60, thus making the visit "free".

    3) Based upon income, the government can provide relief for health insurance premiums or certain out-of-pocket expenses. So the guy making $14,000 per year will still be able to get treated even if he is living from hand to mouth.

    4) Sicker people will pay higher premiums than healthy people, with a subsidy from the government at a certain point if those premiums cannot be afforded. Nobody will be denied insurance based upon health condition.

    5) End group insurance. The entire group insurance model is antiquated, and hails from a time when people tended to work for one company for most of their life, and the company would almost act as a parental figure. That's how company-provided healthcare was born. However, today's economy is far different, and now the burden of providing healthcare has fallen into the laps of today's corporations. It is highly inefficient, unfairly favors the older people, and is a huge profit center for insurance companies. (For example, if you're a healthy 35-year-old, you'd be SHOCKED what your company is paying for your healthcare coverage -- money which could otherwise be used for your salary!) Replace the group insurance with the company simply paying the employees' individual insurance premiums.

    Implement the above, and we will save a ton of money, while not denying anyone care. You'll be shocked how quickly the costs come down once the free market takes hold.
    So now that we decided how we are going to pay way less for healthcare, how is the industry going to rebalance itself for the billions (trillions?) of $$ that just disappeared? I don't know how many people are employed either directly or indirectly in healthcare (10 million? 20 million? 50 million?). Are we just supposed to cut those jobs in half? Instead should we tell everyone working in the industry they are going to make 40% less? Should executives volunteer to take massive voluntary paycuts? I really don't know.

    I will take you at your word that healthcare is a lot less expensive in Europe. In light of this, do you know how the system is able to work? Do people make a lot less $$? Are there a lot less employees (direct and indirect)? Do executives make a lot less? I think this is something that needs to be understood and taken into account if we are really trying to improve our system.
    I canít speak for the majority of countries but I can speak for the UK, my home country. Yes, everyone makes less. Doctors make 6 figures and not 7. Pharma companies get told no when they offer their drugs to the UK at an outrageous price.

  3. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    LOL at Universal Health Care cutting down US healthcare costs.

    No.

    The main cost of US healthcare comes from tests and procedures. The left likes to push the myth that cutting out the insurance middleman will produce huge savings, but that's a drop in the bucket compared to what is actually paid to medical providers, hospitals, and test facilities.

    What aboug Big Pharma? That's some of the problem, but not the main part of it. The pharmaceutical cost can be brought under control far more easily than the cost of the rest of US healthcare. Simply introduce the ability to order pharmaceuticals from other first world countries, and the prices in the US will plummet.

    Healthcare in the US is so expensive for various reasons:

    1) The pricing model is opaque. The patient has no idea what services he's buying (or what they cost) until after he has them, and receives a bill. Furthermore, in the cases where insurance pays all or most of the bill, the patient doesn't care about the cost anyway.

    2) There are no free market forces at work. Doctors and facilities are for what they do, not how well they do it. There is little financial incentive for a doctor to do a good job, but big financial incentives to see large numbers of patients and creatively bill for as many expensive things as possible.

    3) The pricing model is driven by Medicare. That's the benchmark insurance companies use to set "allowed rates", which dictates how much they will pay (and how much in-network patients will be responsible for). Unfortunately, thanks to lobbying and corruption, some Medicare rates are artificially inflated, and that drives the health care industry to push for those test/procedures to be done. A good example is the Nuclear Stress Test in cardiology, which is usually unnecessary (and not good for the patient), but usually prescribed instead of the regular Echo Stress Test, because the Nuclear one costs so much more.

    What will socialized medicine do?

    It will simply shift the bill to the government, with all the same existing problems. But even worse, with all tests/procedures being "free", utilization will go way up, and the net cost will be more.

    Neither party has approached this healthcare fiasco properly. If something reasonable is not put in place soon, then yes, socialized medicine will be in our future -- at least until that is a spectacular failure and it's rolled back.

    How come socialized medicine works in other countries? First off, there's lots of debate as to how well it actually works, but I will concede that cost-wise, other first world countries spend far less per capita on their socialized healthcare systems.

    But that's simply because they don't have all of these horrible price structures in place like the US does, and these wouldn't be dismantled if and when socialized medicine comes to the US. Comparing the US cost to, say, England or Australia, is a apples-to-oranges comparison.

    Right now, what we need is a complete restructuring of the way medical services are sold.

    The following would roughly accomplish this (and I've said it before, btw):

    1) Completely reform the billing system, removing a lot of the hidden charges which turn into "gotchas" for patients. For example, if you go to the doctor for a checkup or examination due to a health concern, the doctor can only bill for the examination, and not for equipment he uses to examine you, or because you mentioned other problems while at the office. Most importantly, a written estimate must be provided to the patient prior to treatment/examination, which will indicate his out-of-pocket cost, and the patient must sign it. This, of course, would be waived in the case of extreme emergency.

    2) Do away with the "preferred provider" model with health insurance. Instead, make health insurance pay for any doctor and any facility, but with a (relatively low) cap on the amount paid for each billable item. Doctors can charge what they want (but must disclose it to the patient before treatment), and the free market will take care of the rest. For example, let's say you want a checkup. Your insurance will pay $60 for it. You can go to a top doctor who might charge $200 for it (meaning you'll pay $140 out of pocket), or you can go to a lower-tier doctor who just charges the $60, thus making the visit "free".

    3) Based upon income, the government can provide relief for health insurance premiums or certain out-of-pocket expenses. So the guy making $14,000 per year will still be able to get treated even if he is living from hand to mouth.

    4) Sicker people will pay higher premiums than healthy people, with a subsidy from the government at a certain point if those premiums cannot be afforded. Nobody will be denied insurance based upon health condition.

    5) End group insurance. The entire group insurance model is antiquated, and hails from a time when people tended to work for one company for most of their life, and the company would almost act as a parental figure. That's how company-provided healthcare was born. However, today's economy is far different, and now the burden of providing healthcare has fallen into the laps of today's corporations. It is highly inefficient, unfairly favors the older people, and is a huge profit center for insurance companies. (For example, if you're a healthy 35-year-old, you'd be SHOCKED what your company is paying for your healthcare coverage -- money which could otherwise be used for your salary!) Replace the group insurance with the company simply paying the employees' individual insurance premiums.

    Implement the above, and we will save a ton of money, while not denying anyone care. You'll be shocked how quickly the costs come down once the free market takes hold.


    #4 seems an unworkable problem, and the subsidies would be so large that it would have the same result as socialized medicine without the perks of socialized medicine. 57% of Americans have <$1000 in the bank. Blacks and Hispanics are both at 47% obesity, and Iíd guess, probably have more like 85% under $1000 in savings as having a college degree correlates with lower obesity rates.

    Smoking rates have consistently went down everywhere, but obesity is skyrocketing everywhere, and is driving all the costs.


    I am interested, going forward, to see if a national health care system, or any system, is sustainable anywhere outside Asia given the trajectory. While less obese than the US, the obesity rates in the UK are rising at a faster rate than even here. So whatever it has cost there and anywhere, if the obesity rates continue at this rate, it will eventually be unsustainable.

    What that system cost in the past, and what it will cost going forward, and whether the penalties theyíve implemented on shit food serve to alter this horrible trajectory remains to be seen.

    Everything else you point to, the billing, and everything else even if corrected perfectly, is simply a bandaid on a bullet wound unless we can reverse course on obesity. We need something similar to a war time effort against obesity or everything else is simply rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic. The system will still go down given the current trajectory.

    There is nothing else that fixes our problem. Youíre right that there are parts of the US health care system that simply donít lend itself to socialized health care, but itís going to happen, because there are too many special interest groups also fighting to keep us fat and get unhealthy shit subsidized.

    Honestly, when over half your populace is overweight, and pushing toward 40% being obese in the next 10 years, talking about health care costs and anything else besides that is akin to that old SNL skit where all the doctors are smoking around the bedside and lamenting what is causing all this cancer.


    Weíll eventually go socialized medicine, it will fail and be extraordinarily expensive, and then weíll be ready to have a grown up conversation about the draconian measures necessary to fix the actual problem. Youíll have CPS arresting parents shoveling McDonalds down their kids throats, appropriately. Youíll have deadlines to meet a certain weight or your coverage will drop. Youíll have random drug testing, which if you fail, will cause your coverage to drop.


    There is no system created that can fix the issue when at the current trajectory over a 1/3 of Americans will have full blown diabetes by 2050. Over 20% of people over 20 already have high blood sugar/pre diabetes.

    Any notion you can be fat and healthy need to be disabused. Some smokers never develop cancer, but health care costs are about the average person, and even someone who dodges the diabetes ends up needing a 50k knee replacement because of the weight. One weight related surgery is akin to someone being on SSDI for like 5 years. You just canít fade these costs. Eventually itís all going down.

    The emergence of fast food, every gas station having garbage readily available to grab, 800 calorie coffees on the way to work, the nature of our work now being less physical, and what we have subsidized has created a greater threat to the financial stability of our country than the housing crisis or bank failures or anything else. Those situations are more easily corrected. Itís harder to correct an entirely flawed mindset that pervades all ethnic groups and both political parties in regards to weight. You can have a system handed down by god himself and perfectly efficient and absent of corruption and it wonít be affordable when a third of the population have preventable chronic health problems. If that isnít reversed, any other system is simply kicking the can down the road.

  4. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by BCR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    LOL at Universal Health Care cutting down US healthcare costs.

    No.

    The main cost of US healthcare comes from tests and procedures. The left likes to push the myth that cutting out the insurance middleman will produce huge savings, but that's a drop in the bucket compared to what is actually paid to medical providers, hospitals, and test facilities.

    What aboug Big Pharma? That's some of the problem, but not the main part of it. The pharmaceutical cost can be brought under control far more easily than the cost of the rest of US healthcare. Simply introduce the ability to order pharmaceuticals from other first world countries, and the prices in the US will plummet.

    Healthcare in the US is so expensive for various reasons:

    1) The pricing model is opaque. The patient has no idea what services he's buying (or what they cost) until after he has them, and receives a bill. Furthermore, in the cases where insurance pays all or most of the bill, the patient doesn't care about the cost anyway.

    2) There are no free market forces at work. Doctors and facilities are for what they do, not how well they do it. There is little financial incentive for a doctor to do a good job, but big financial incentives to see large numbers of patients and creatively bill for as many expensive things as possible.

    3) The pricing model is driven by Medicare. That's the benchmark insurance companies use to set "allowed rates", which dictates how much they will pay (and how much in-network patients will be responsible for). Unfortunately, thanks to lobbying and corruption, some Medicare rates are artificially inflated, and that drives the health care industry to push for those test/procedures to be done. A good example is the Nuclear Stress Test in cardiology, which is usually unnecessary (and not good for the patient), but usually prescribed instead of the regular Echo Stress Test, because the Nuclear one costs so much more.

    What will socialized medicine do?

    It will simply shift the bill to the government, with all the same existing problems. But even worse, with all tests/procedures being "free", utilization will go way up, and the net cost will be more.

    Neither party has approached this healthcare fiasco properly. If something reasonable is not put in place soon, then yes, socialized medicine will be in our future -- at least until that is a spectacular failure and it's rolled back.

    How come socialized medicine works in other countries? First off, there's lots of debate as to how well it actually works, but I will concede that cost-wise, other first world countries spend far less per capita on their socialized healthcare systems.

    But that's simply because they don't have all of these horrible price structures in place like the US does, and these wouldn't be dismantled if and when socialized medicine comes to the US. Comparing the US cost to, say, England or Australia, is a apples-to-oranges comparison.

    Right now, what we need is a complete restructuring of the way medical services are sold.

    The following would roughly accomplish this (and I've said it before, btw):

    1) Completely reform the billing system, removing a lot of the hidden charges which turn into "gotchas" for patients. For example, if you go to the doctor for a checkup or examination due to a health concern, the doctor can only bill for the examination, and not for equipment he uses to examine you, or because you mentioned other problems while at the office. Most importantly, a written estimate must be provided to the patient prior to treatment/examination, which will indicate his out-of-pocket cost, and the patient must sign it. This, of course, would be waived in the case of extreme emergency.

    2) Do away with the "preferred provider" model with health insurance. Instead, make health insurance pay for any doctor and any facility, but with a (relatively low) cap on the amount paid for each billable item. Doctors can charge what they want (but must disclose it to the patient before treatment), and the free market will take care of the rest. For example, let's say you want a checkup. Your insurance will pay $60 for it. You can go to a top doctor who might charge $200 for it (meaning you'll pay $140 out of pocket), or you can go to a lower-tier doctor who just charges the $60, thus making the visit "free".

    3) Based upon income, the government can provide relief for health insurance premiums or certain out-of-pocket expenses. So the guy making $14,000 per year will still be able to get treated even if he is living from hand to mouth.

    4) Sicker people will pay higher premiums than healthy people, with a subsidy from the government at a certain point if those premiums cannot be afforded. Nobody will be denied insurance based upon health condition.

    5) End group insurance. The entire group insurance model is antiquated, and hails from a time when people tended to work for one company for most of their life, and the company would almost act as a parental figure. That's how company-provided healthcare was born. However, today's economy is far different, and now the burden of providing healthcare has fallen into the laps of today's corporations. It is highly inefficient, unfairly favors the older people, and is a huge profit center for insurance companies. (For example, if you're a healthy 35-year-old, you'd be SHOCKED what your company is paying for your healthcare coverage -- money which could otherwise be used for your salary!) Replace the group insurance with the company simply paying the employees' individual insurance premiums.

    Implement the above, and we will save a ton of money, while not denying anyone care. You'll be shocked how quickly the costs come down once the free market takes hold.


    #4 seems an unworkable problem, and the subsidies would be so large that it would have the same result as socialized medicine without the perks of socialized medicine. 57% of Americans have <$1000 in the bank. Blacks and Hispanics are both at 47% obesity, and Iíd guess, probably have more like 85% under $1000 in savings as having a college degree correlates with lower obesity rates.

    Smoking rates have consistently went down everywhere, but obesity is skyrocketing everywhere, and is driving all the costs.


    I am interested, going forward, to see if a national health care system, or any system, is sustainable anywhere outside Asia given the trajectory. While less obese than the US, the obesity rates in the UK are rising at a faster rate than even here. So whatever it has cost there and anywhere, if the obesity rates continue at this rate, it will eventually be unsustainable.

    What that system cost in the past, and what it will cost going forward, and whether the penalties theyíve implemented on shit food serve to alter this horrible trajectory remains to be seen.

    Everything else you point to, the billing, and everything else even if corrected perfectly, is simply a bandaid on a bullet wound unless we can reverse course on obesity. We need something similar to a war time effort against obesity or everything else is simply rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic. The system will still go down given the current trajectory.

    There is nothing else that fixes our problem. Youíre right that there are parts of the US health care system that simply donít lend itself to socialized health care, but itís going to happen, because there are too many special interest groups also fighting to keep us fat and get unhealthy shit subsidized.

    Honestly, when over half your populace is overweight, and pushing toward 40% being obese in the next 10 years, talking about health care costs and anything else besides that is akin to that old SNL skit where all the doctors are smoking around the bedside and lamenting what is causing all this cancer.


    Weíll eventually go socialized medicine, it will fail and be extraordinarily expensive, and then weíll be ready to have a grown up conversation about the draconian measures necessary to fix the actual problem. Youíll have CPS arresting parents shoveling McDonalds down their kids throats, appropriately. Youíll have deadlines to meet a certain weight or your coverage will drop. Youíll have random drug testing, which if you fail, will cause your coverage to drop.


    There is no system created that can fix the issue when at the current trajectory over a 1/3 of Americans will have full blown diabetes by 2050. Over 20% of people over 20 already have high blood sugar/pre diabetes.

    Any notion you can be fat and healthy need to be disabused. Some smokers never develop cancer, but health care costs are about the average person, and even someone who dodges the diabetes ends up needing a 50k knee replacement because of the weight. One weight related surgery is akin to someone being on SSDI for like 5 years. You just canít fade these costs. Eventually itís all going down.

    The emergence of fast food, every gas station having garbage readily available to grab, 800 calorie coffees on the way to work, the nature of our work now being less physical, and what we have subsidized has created a greater threat to the financial stability of our country than the housing crisis or bank failures or anything else. Those situations are more easily corrected. Itís harder to correct an entirely flawed mindset that pervades all ethnic groups and both political parties in regards to weight. You can have a system handed down by god himself and perfectly efficient and absent of corruption and it wonít be affordable when a third of the population have preventable chronic health problems. If that isnít reversed, any other system is simply kicking the can down the road.
    This is so accurate, it's scary. In the UK last year, I noticed very many svelte people, but there were obese here and there too. The family size "crisps" I saw at convenience stores were way smaller than a United States sized regular bag of Lay's potato chips. That is one example, but it did seem like restaurant portions were not so much smaller.

    Food is delicious and along with western wealth/freedom, it so easy to be feasting all the time...

    Perhaps the only savior for health care/the economy is the invention of a true appetite quashing pill.

     
    Comments
      
      MrTickle: using the word 'Svelte'

  5. #85
    Did Druff forget the elephant in the room, Citizens United?

    Translation: What Druff's really saying is don't change a thing, the pigs at the trough are making a fortune.

    As long as the healthcare industry is allowed to legally bribe our elected reps/lawmakers everything he suggested is a pipe dream and i think he know that. Not to mention their cozy relationship w the MSM.

    There's not a chance in hell universal HC will pass.

    Look at Trump's response to the deadly opioid epidemic.
    66,OOO PEOPLE DIED IN 2017, you wouldn't know it watching the news.
    After leaving the position unfilled for months

    Nominee- This is so monumentally fucking insane and it's hardly even newsworthy. This is a splendid example of the state of American politics and media.
    Rep. Tom Marino, R-Pa., has withdrawn his name from consideration as America's drug czar, President Trump said Tuesday. Marino is stepping back days after reports that legislation he sponsored hindered the Drug Enforcement Administration in its fight against the U.S. opioid crisis.
    Read up on Morino wtf
    Then Trump appointed a 24 yo staffer who's a college grad and who one time organized a charity golf tourney.

    Now Conway, she used to be the Mercers secretary.
    White House counselor Kellyanne Conway has taken control of the opioids agenda, quietly freezing out drug policy professionals and relying instead on political staff to address a lethal crisis claiming about 175 lives a day. The main response so far has been to call for a border wall and to promise a "just say no” campaign.

    Trump is expected to propose massive cuts this month to the “drug czar” office, just as he attempted in last year’s budget before backing off. He hasn’t named a permanent director for the office, and the chief of staff was sacked in December. For months, the office’s top political appointee was a 24-year-old Trump campaign staffer with no relevant qualifications. Its senior leadership consists of a skeleton crew of three political appointees, down from nine a year ago.

    "It’s fair to say the ONDCP has pretty much been systematically excluded from key decisions about opioids and the strategy moving forward,”
    Escalate the problem so more profits for big pharma, more white genocide and lock up the victims for their private prison donors. Those fuckin bastards are scapegoating "white racists" for their profitable child separation scheme too.

    3 out of 4 Heroin users start w opioids,
    Young white males are the overwhelming majority of victims

    Our elected officials won't stop the profit of one deadly drug and you really think they'll pass Universal HC.
    Go look at Bernie's twitter once in a while, get out of the bubble for a min

    A quote from Rolling Stone 2 days ago
    "Fentanyl Changed the Opioid Epidemic. Now It’s Getting Worse
    The super-potent opioid is getting cut in at every level, and is spreading west. Now, experts say, it could replace heroin entirely"

    Nice, that was the plan according to that shill on the JRE

    Edit:
    While deaths from abuse of opioids in the US are rampant – at 33,000 in 2015 – the death rate in Israel is 1/30 of that and declining, according to a study at Ariel University.

    The study found that the already low mortality rate in Israel has been declining in recent years – a clear reversal of the notion that everything that happens in the US eventually gets to Israel.
    Why? last paragraph.
    Yet another explanation for the gap is that while in Israel pharmaceutical companies are not allowed to advertise prescription drugs directly to the consumer, in the US direct marketing and advertising of prescription drugs, including opioids, are freely permitted.

    Conspiracy fr the media masters.
    Last edited by FPS_Russia; 09-03-2018 at 09:40 AM.

  6. #86
    Gold MrTickle's Avatar
    Reputation
    414
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    1,670
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    If you don't provide healthcare nowadays (at least at skilled jobs), employees look down on your company as shit, and don't want to work there.

    What really needs to happen is an outlawing of group plans (as I mentioned), and then these companies can still provide healthcare by simply reimbursing the employee (and their family) for the premiums they'll pay.

    Tons of bloat in those premiums currently paid for group plans, but companies feel trapped and are forced to pay it.

    I worked for a small company from 1998-2003. Just like what I suggested above, they were simply reimbursing employees for their individual plans. This worked fine until they hired some salesmen with preexisting health conditions, and suddenly the only way to insure these guys was to buy a small group plan. The owner of the company used to come into my office in the evening and complain how the insurance companies were robbing him blind with the premiums.
    This is the problem with free market capitalism and economic liberalism. Capitalism sees an agreement to be employed by a company as a free choice. Free choice to sign a contract, work under those conditions etc. If you don't want to do it (low wage, no healthcare etc.) then you don't take the job. Easy!

    But lets face it - for many people it's not a free choice but they have to accept any job because they have no qualifications and they're low-skilled, meaning any job which pays them minimum wage has to be taken. You think someone unemployed and begging for absolutely anyone to employ them will say no because a company doesn't offer healthcare? Come off it.

    It doesn't matter if people look down on the company.

    Healthcare in the US needs to be reformed because it cannot be put in the hand of the free market.

     
    Comments
      
      sah_24: luls yup def capitalism's fault ... not the low skilled worker #libtards101

  7. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanlmar View Post
    Company provided health care was a way to attract employees during an era of wage controls in the US.

    In high tech it is still used as a powerful benefit. It’s free

    From what I can tell even little startups and VC ops are offering free health care.

    The trend is free and astounds me but there you have it.

    Haves and have nots.
    If you don't provide healthcare nowadays (at least at skilled jobs), employees look down on your company as shit, and don't want to work there.

    What really needs to happen is an outlawing of group plans (as I mentioned), and then these companies can still provide healthcare by simply reimbursing the employee (and their family) for the premiums they'll pay.

    Tons of bloat in those premiums currently paid for group plans, but companies feel trapped and are forced to pay it.

    I worked for a small company from 1998-2003. Just like what I suggested above, they were simply reimbursing employees for their individual plans. This worked fine until they hired some salesmen with preexisting health conditions, and suddenly the only way to insure these guys was to buy a small group plan. The owner of the company used to come into my office in the evening and complain how the insurance companies were robbing him blind with the premiums.
    The healthcare problem is so overwhelming I can’t wrap my head around the macroeconomics.

    I’m in the fitness industry and try to capture insurance wellness dollars where I can. The insurers are so fucked up and really don’t care about your future wellness. You will be on another plan next year. It’s about the next quarter. They aren’t investing in you.

    I go to Florida a lot. I don’t really have a circle of friends there and needed something to do. So I got involved in a classic car club. They rent garage spaces in a prefab warehouse kinda building. Restore and tinker with cars... sit around and swap lies. Something to do.

    All these guys skew older. It’s Florida.

    I leave Florida feeling I missed a golden age. The post WWII crowd. One of these guys worked for IBM. He was an underage WWII soldier. First generation American of immigrant parents. Learned some mechanical skills in military. Works for IBM his whole life as a machinist in Armonk NY.

    Full retirement at maybe 62. Full medical. Saved some money with company stock. Has a comfortable worry free life. Never stressed about employment or retirement.

    Another guy goes to work for Ford. Union guy. Worked in the paint department. Lifetime of employment. Guy has a Pooh house. Again, full retirement and full health care. Completely immune from today’s shit show.

    Just guys who raised families, worked all their lives and are enjoying the final payoff of what used to be the American dream.

    Unions and lifetime employment are dead. Retiring at 62 is dead. Working til you’re 80 and bankruptcy due to health care expense is the new American reality.

    Portable 401k and a completely uncertain health insurance future is a fail for the vast majority of our country. These are Trump’s desperate devotees. Angry, poor, uncertain and searching for revolution.

    Calamity is the catalyst for change. Dodd Frank never woulda happened if half the country didn’t end up broke and homeless.

    The broke and underinsured baby boomers are a bomb set to go off.

    Lol, it’s Labor Day. What a joke.

     
    Comments
      
      GambleBotsSatire: Positive Reputation

  8. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by MrTickle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by verminaard View Post

    So now that we decided how we are going to pay way less for healthcare, how is the industry going to rebalance itself for the billions (trillions?) of $$ that just disappeared? I don't know how many people are employed either directly or indirectly in healthcare (10 million? 20 million? 50 million?). Are we just supposed to cut those jobs in half? Instead should we tell everyone working in the industry they are going to make 40% less? Should executives volunteer to take massive voluntary paycuts? I really don't know.

    I will take you at your word that healthcare is a lot less expensive in Europe. In light of this, do you know how the system is able to work? Do people make a lot less $$? Are there a lot less employees (direct and indirect)? Do executives make a lot less? I think this is something that needs to be understood and taken into account if we are really trying to improve our system.
    I canít speak for the majority of countries but I can speak for the UK, my home country. Yes, everyone makes less. Doctors make 6 figures and not 7. Pharma companies get told no when they offer their drugs to the UK at an outrageous price.
    The vast majority of doctors make ~$200k/yr. That is why the median salary is around ~$200k despite a very small minority of specialists who make a lot more. Its a comfortable upper middle class lifestyle, but nothing more, especially if you didn't come from money and had to take out loans for your education. Most doctors who have actual wealth it is because they were born into it or they made successful investments over their life.

    I think any "solution" to the healthcare cost issue that involved the vast majority of doctors making less $$ would be a disaster for the medical industry the way it is currently constituted. Just my 2c.

    I am sure you could streamline the system and make it more efficient and eliminate a lot of jobs, so salaries don't have to go down, but I am not sure how good a solution that is either, because I think any "solution" that involves getting rid of millions of middle-class jobs is going to be bad for society at large.

  9. #89
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    7093
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    44,522
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by verminaard View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrTickle View Post

    I canít speak for the majority of countries but I can speak for the UK, my home country. Yes, everyone makes less. Doctors make 6 figures and not 7. Pharma companies get told no when they offer their drugs to the UK at an outrageous price.
    The vast majority of doctors make ~$200k/yr. That is why the median salary is around ~$200k despite a very small minority of specialists who make a lot more. Its a comfortable upper middle class lifestyle, but nothing more, especially if you didn't come from money and had to take out loans for your education. Most doctors who have actual wealth it is because they were born into it or they made successful investments over their life.

    I think any "solution" to the healthcare cost issue that involved the vast majority of doctors making less $$ would be a disaster for the medical industry the way it is currently constituted. Just my 2c.

    I am sure you could streamline the system and make it more efficient and eliminate a lot of jobs, so salaries don't have to go down, but I am not sure how good a solution that is either, because I think any "solution" that involves getting rid of millions of middle-class jobs is going to be bad for society at large.
    The problem is HOW the money is being made.

    Right now there are no free market forces at work, and the entire billing system is both opaque and arbitrary. Getting in a CT scan machine for a few minutes costs thousands, yet some doctors actually make less than that for performing important/complex surgery.

    Often seemingly simple tests cost a staggering sum of money. Basic exams can cost patients double or triple if they simply say the wrong words to trigger another billing code. One visit for something relatively simple and standard can be broken down into 8 different procedure codes, turning what seems like a standard office visit into a hefty bill. Then there's the "drive-by doctoring" scam, where a doctor will invite his friend/accomplice for a "second opinion", and that doctor will get paid a lot of money (doctors have figured out which kinds of drive-by-doctoring are most lucrative).

    And then there's the in-network/out-of-network garbage, which is confusing and often difficult to track, due to the ever-changing status of certain offices. And then there's the perplexing two-tiered cost for care for someone who has insurance versus someone who doesn't. Why should the doctor receive so much more money because the person doesn't have insurance?

    We have two places to go: Either a complete redo of the way healthcare costs and is billed, or we will end up in a completely screwed up socialized medicine situation, which won't at all resemble its European counterparts.

  10. #90
    Outside the bubble: Employers providing HC is a thing of the past, now they're not making enough to eat and pay rent.
    Jeff Bezos has to be the biggest pile of shit. To think that there's voters who take Bezo's side in this argument. This is Neoliberalism,

    That moment when you realize a new Bolshevik revo is way past due.
    Look how much we could squeeze out of one evil douchebag.

     
    Comments
      
      sah_24: no one forced them to work at Amazon

  11. #91
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    7093
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    44,522
    Blog Entries
    2
    I don't agree that the obesity problem in the West is the reason for healthcare being headed off a cliff.

    I will concede that people are, overall, living less healthy lifestyles than in the past, due to a change in conveniences and availability of unhealthy food, along with an overall more sedentary lifestyle.

    However, that has been counteracted by positive changes by information learned over time:

    - There are far fewer US smokers than before (this is huge)

    - Cancer-causing substances such as asbestos have been outlawed from construction material

    - Air quality has vastly improved

    - Automobiles are far safer than they used to be

    - Blood pressure and cholesterol medications have allowed people to control dangerous levels in both of these areas

    - Laparoscopic surgery techniques have reduced the risk of complications and hospital stay times for many procedures


    This is why people in the US still have a longer life expectancy now than any time in the country's history.

    Also, healthy people living until a late age are also expensive, because there are tons of medical problems which pop up for old people, no matter how healthy they live. This costs money. The obese 40-year-old will still be cheaper in an average year than the healthy-living 80-year-old. So if that obese 40-year-old croaks early and never makes it to 65, while his care may be expensive in middle age compared to other middle-aged people, it mostly evens out because the person lives a shorter time.

    Let's get back to Ocasio-Cortez. She laughably said that "the cost of funerals isn't being factored in" to our healthcare cost crisis, stating that people dying early from lack of access to healthcare is expensive because of all the funerals we need for them. First and foremost, this was ridiculous to say because everyone dies at some point, so a funeral is in everyone's future. But the more interesting discussion point from this is also the fact that society would BENEFIT financially if everyone died early. That sounds morbid to say, but it's true. I'm not saying we should wish for life expectancies to go down, but from a cost standpoint, old people are expensive and do not produce much (similar to children). However, unlike children, old people will never go back to a productive or less expensive life phase, whereas the children will grow up and (mostly) help society during their able-bodied adult years.

    My point is that I don't believe our crisis is an unhealthy population or a lack or preventative care. The crisis is in a medical and pharmaceutical economic system which is out of control. A secondary crisis exists in the US with a general doctor shortage.

     
    Comments
      
      BCR: It was <10% of health care expenditures in 2006. It’s 21% now. It’s the biggest single issue.

  12. #92
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    7093
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    44,522
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by blake View Post
    a lot of what you're proposing here is basically obamacare, and kind of socialist

    i'm not disagreeing with you. just saying
    There are some Obamacare-like elements to what I'm proposing, but there are some big differences.

    Namely, it will address the cost situation (Obamacare does NOTHING to address this), and it will give everyone the choice to see the doctors they want, without insurance influencing that.

    It will bring the free market into the picture, which is badly needed in the world of healthcare.

  13. #93
    100% Organic MumblesBadly's Avatar
    Reputation
    77
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    In the many threads of this forum
    Posts
    8,958
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by blake View Post
    a lot of what you're proposing here is basically obamacare, and kind of socialist

    i'm not disagreeing with you. just saying
    There are some Obamacare-like elements to what I'm proposing, but there are some big differences.

    Namely, it will address the cost situation (Obamacare does NOTHING to address this), and it will give everyone the choice to see the doctors they want, without insurance influencing that.

    It will bring the free market into the picture, which is badly needed in the world of healthcare.
    When Congress stops allowing the AMA to control how many doctors are trained in US medical schools (to keep the market of doctors from being growing too quickly), as well as let the hospitals coordinate which medical school grads to offer a residency to, AND state officials reduce the power of local doctors to stifle competitiom and predatory medical practices via their control over local medical boards, *then* the US medical care field would have a better chance of approaching a “free market”. But until then, doctors in the US can continue to expect to earn vastly more than what a “free market” would drive.

     
    Comments
      
      FPS_Russia: Yep, intentional Dr shortage.
    _____________________________________________
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    I actually hope this [second impeachment] succeeds, because I want Trump put down politically like a sick, 14-year-old dog. ... I don't want him complicating the 2024 primary season. I just want him done.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Were Republicans cowardly or unethical not to go along with [convicting Trump in the second impeachment Senate trial]? No. The smart move was to reject it.

  14. #94
    Yawn , just solved the opioid crisis.

    For the record, here's the solution to the opioid epidemic.

    Ban drug advertising to the public.
    Allow easy access to weed.


    Those two things are the reason why Israel has 1/30th of opiate related deaths as the US.
    Last edited by FPS_Russia; 09-03-2018 at 02:05 PM.

  15. #95

  16. #96
    Master of Props Daly's Avatar
    Reputation
    2299
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    9,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanlmar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    If you don't provide healthcare nowadays (at least at skilled jobs), employees look down on your company as shit, and don't want to work there.

    What really needs to happen is an outlawing of group plans (as I mentioned), and then these companies can still provide healthcare by simply reimbursing the employee (and their family) for the premiums they'll pay.

    Tons of bloat in those premiums currently paid for group plans, but companies feel trapped and are forced to pay it.

    I worked for a small company from 1998-2003. Just like what I suggested above, they were simply reimbursing employees for their individual plans. This worked fine until they hired some salesmen with preexisting health conditions, and suddenly the only way to insure these guys was to buy a small group plan. The owner of the company used to come into my office in the evening and complain how the insurance companies were robbing him blind with the premiums.
    The healthcare problem is so overwhelming I canít wrap my head around the macroeconomics.

    Iím in the fitness industry and try to capture insurance wellness dollars where I can. The insurers are so fucked up and really donít care about your future wellness. You will be on another plan next year. Itís about the next quarter. They arenít investing in you.

    I go to Florida a lot. I donít really have a circle of friends there and needed something to do. So I got involved in a classic car club. They rent garage spaces in a prefab warehouse kinda building. Restore and tinker with cars... sit around and swap lies. Something to do.

    All these guys skew older. Itís Florida.

    I leave Florida feeling I missed a golden age. The post WWII crowd. One of these guys worked for IBM. He was an underage WWII soldier. First generation American of immigrant parents. Learned some mechanical skills in military. Works for IBM his whole life as a machinist in Armonk NY.

    Full retirement at maybe 62. Full medical. Saved some money with company stock. Has a comfortable worry free life. Never stressed about employment or retirement.

    Another guy goes to work for Ford. Union guy. Worked in the paint department. Lifetime of employment. Guy has a Pooh house. Again, full retirement and full health care. Completely immune from todayís shit show.

    Just guys who raised families, worked all their lives and are enjoying the final payoff of what used to be the American dream.

    Unions and lifetime employment are dead. Retiring at 62 is dead. Working til youíre 80 and bankruptcy due to health care expense is the new American reality.

    Portable 401k and a completely uncertain health insurance future is a fail for the vast majority of our country. These are Trumpís desperate devotees. Angry, poor, uncertain and searching for revolution.

    Calamity is the catalyst for change. Dodd Frank never woulda happened if half the country didnít end up broke and homeless.

    The broke and underinsured baby boomers are a bomb set to go off.

    Lol, itís Labor Day. What a joke.

    Might be your best post ever San.... sorry I missed it the first time around

     
    Comments
      
      Tellafriend: yep, spot on like usual

  17. #97
    Platinum thesparten's Avatar
    Reputation
    -13
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    3,590
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by tony bagadonuts View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by hongkonger View Post
    Is she calling herself a socialist? I thought she considered herself a democratic socialist. There's a difference.
    Meagan Day, a Democratic Socialist and writer for the socialist magazine Jacobin writes:

    "I’m a staff writer at the socialist magazine Jacobin and a member of DSA, and here’s the truth: In the long run, democratic socialists want to end capitalism. And we want to do that by pursuing a reform agenda today in an effort to revive a politics focused on class hierarchy and inequality in the United States. The eventual goal is to transform the world to promote everyone’s needs rather than to produce massive profits for a small handful of citizens."

    “Social democratic reforms like Medicare-for-all are, in the eyes of DSA, part of the long, uneven process of building that support, and eventually overthrowing capitalism.”

    https://www.vox.com/first-person/201...sm-jacobin-dsa
    Dude,

    They love her over here.

    She is there "intellectual" William f Buckley...

    I was haveing a discussion with one of my Latino friends and said why are u arguing for more food stamps and government control over you life?

    Wouldn't it be better to argue for more opportunities and living wages??? And more personal freedoms??

    Around hear there are a couple of things going on..

    People DO LIKE TRUMP!! However too be honest they don't aspire too anything..

    They just want a free apartment some free food and the libs are actually very very racist and sexist..

    The white man this and the white man that and all the progressive,s play into it and encourage it!!!!

    Yet if a white man uses the wrong pronoun or complains they want too criminalize that..

    We are being "yellow stard"..

    All the people of color want too do is procreate and have liesure while everything is provided for that lifestyle.

    They want gtd seats to university and all the comferts provided for them while the white libtards pay half there salery on three jobs in taxes and have a meager existence of exaustion and stress..(we are being culled, it's a soft kill)..

    Everything eurocentric is penalized taxes and regulated and criminalized and everything else is is subsidized and retains no personal responsibility..

    For one small example, just ask druff every time he puts off a doctor's appointment over money or if he goes he has too epty out his bank account and yet there are 3 clinics and 2 dentistas and 2 pharmacias on every block around here that nobody pays for and THEY DO HAVE PERFECT PEARLY WHITES..

    ALL THE GOVERNMENT jobs they get over more qualified white people while working class white people can only get jobs at Walmart even though they qualify for better AND RAISE THERE TAXES AND TELL THERE KIDS THE AVAILABLE COLLEGE SEATS GO TO SOMEBODY OF COLOR OVER YOUR KIDS, LOL

    ITS SOOOOO SAD, but I actually blame the rhinos not the DEMOCRAT,s..

    Just like now, Paul Ryan can find 180 billion for an omnibus over night but can't find 25 billion for a freaken wall while we're being inandated..lol..

    He can find 40 billion for south American infrastructure while Carlos slim lives a tax free existence over there..

     
    Comments
      
      MumblesBadly: Mexico, which Carlos Slim is a citizen of, isn’t in South America, sparttard.
    Last edited by thesparten; 12-01-2018 at 09:05 AM.

  18. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan Eisenhower View Post
    AOC in her prime:

    Name:  0Xtj8db.gif
Views: 482
Size:  5.60 MB
    Name:  KeHIb8a.jpg
Views: 242
Size:  10.4 KB
    Name:  daffy.gif
Views: 221
Size:  39.6 KB
    Name:  bareback.jpg
Views: 228
Size:  27.0 KB
    Name:  wank.gif
Views: 252
Size:  410.2 KB

  19. #99

  20. #100
    It's going to be hot as fuck when she personally demands sidedish suck his state mandated trannie dicks to get out of his next DUI charge.
    "Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky

    "America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Cortez, the socialist bitch
    By thesparten in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 01-12-2019, 05:58 PM

Tags for this Thread