Page 52 of 52 FirstFirst ... 2424849505152
Results 1,021 to 1,040 of 1040

Thread: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

  1. #1021
    Diamond big dick's Avatar
    Reputation
    1150
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    fuck krypt
    Posts
    7,723
    would you fuck her jimmy? or are you gay?

  2. #1022
    100% Organic MumblesBadly's Avatar
    Reputation
    -148
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    In the many threads of this forum
    Posts
    7,117

     
    Comments
      
      dwai: SHUT THE FUCK UP FAGGOT BITCH
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellafriend View Post
    There is only one scumbag here:


    ME

  3. #1023
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    4687
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    32,883
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by MumblesBadly View Post
    First off, David Doel's background of "scenic cliffs with ocean in the early evening" is obnoxious and distracting. Small nitpick, but it's just dumb that this guy has to put himself in front of scenery during his show. Oddly, he has a neutral background to start, then switches to the cliffs for no reason once AOC comes on. It doesn't even fit well with the show's theme (instead of, say, a background of downtown-looking buildings at night during a talk show.)

    Anyway, clearly someone wrote that speech for AOC, and clearly whoever wrote it thought they were really cleverl. And clearly you, Mumbles, and other leftists ate it up.

    However, what she said means very little. Not many Republicans argue that healthcare is a commodity, nor would recognizing its lack of being a commodity fix our country's healthcare problems.

    If anything, her point strengthens opposition to a Medicare For All system, as she states that "people will do anything to keep themselves alive", and that will become even more true when someone else is paying the bill. It will no longer just be "keeping yourself alive", but rather visiting the doctor on any whim or slight suspicion of a problem, because there's no cost to doing so. This will, in turn, lead to even higher costs, and tremendous waits to get care -- which we already see in existing socialized systems elsewhere.

    So, thanks AOC! You have helped make the case against socialized medicine without realizing it!

  4. #1024
    Gold MrTickle's Avatar
    Reputation
    357
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    1,303
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MumblesBadly View Post
    First off, David Doel's background of "scenic cliffs with ocean in the early evening" is obnoxious and distracting. Small nitpick, but it's just dumb that this guy has to put himself in front of scenery during his show. Oddly, he has a neutral background to start, then switches to the cliffs for no reason once AOC comes on. It doesn't even fit well with the show's theme (instead of, say, a background of downtown-looking buildings at night during a talk show.)

    Anyway, clearly someone wrote that speech for AOC, and clearly whoever wrote it thought they were really cleverl. And clearly you, Mumbles, and other leftists ate it up.

    However, what she said means very little. Not many Republicans argue that healthcare is a commodity, nor would recognizing its lack of being a commodity fix our country's healthcare problems.

    If anything, her point strengthens opposition to a Medicare For All system, as she states that "people will do anything to keep themselves alive", and that will become even more true when someone else is paying the bill. It will no longer just be "keeping yourself alive", but rather visiting the doctor on any whim or slight suspicion of a problem, because there's no cost to doing so. This will, in turn, lead to even higher costs, and tremendous waits to get care -- which we already see in existing socialized systems elsewhere.

    So, thanks AOC! You have helped make the case against socialized medicine without realizing it!
    Why do you think she couldn’t have written it herself? Is it because she’s a woman, or because she’s POC?

     
    Comments
      
      MumblesBadly: Because he’s a misogynist?

  5. #1025
    Nova Scotia's #1 Party Rocker!!!!11 DJ_Chaps's Avatar
    Reputation
    735
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    5,186
    Quote Originally Posted by MrTickle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    First off, David Doel's background of "scenic cliffs with ocean in the early evening" is obnoxious and distracting. Small nitpick, but it's just dumb that this guy has to put himself in front of scenery during his show. Oddly, he has a neutral background to start, then switches to the cliffs for no reason once AOC comes on. It doesn't even fit well with the show's theme (instead of, say, a background of downtown-looking buildings at night during a talk show.)

    Anyway, clearly someone wrote that speech for AOC, and clearly whoever wrote it thought they were really cleverl. And clearly you, Mumbles, and other leftists ate it up.

    However, what she said means very little. Not many Republicans argue that healthcare is a commodity, nor would recognizing its lack of being a commodity fix our country's healthcare problems.

    If anything, her point strengthens opposition to a Medicare For All system, as she states that "people will do anything to keep themselves alive", and that will become even more true when someone else is paying the bill. It will no longer just be "keeping yourself alive", but rather visiting the doctor on any whim or slight suspicion of a problem, because there's no cost to doing so. This will, in turn, lead to even higher costs, and tremendous waits to get care -- which we already see in existing socialized systems elsewhere.

    So, thanks AOC! You have helped make the case against socialized medicine without realizing it!
    Why do you think she couldn’t have written it herself? Is it because she’s a woman, or because she’s POC?

    BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE HAVE WRITERS, SO SPARE US OUR SJW RHETORIC.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chaps' 2017-18 NFL $$ Thread

  6. #1026
    FWIW,

    Lower income people that qualify for free healthcare are actually significantly LESS likely to use medical services than people who pay for their healthcare, normally through insurance.

    Of course that is part of the problem, is that people don’t go to the doctor or get the tests when they should, and end up ignoring the problem too long and end up in emergency rooms and/or developing serious, very expensive medical issues.

    So Druff, you are right for all the wrong reasons.
    I smoke color purple
    I'm up in here feeling like silly
    Nappy ass dreads, what's that you say?
    Watch your mouth, Milli Vanilli
    You can get snaked, you can get faked
    I'll buy the bitch that you feeling
    'Cause you thought that she was an angel
    That bitch ain't no angel, I treat her halo like a Frisbee

  7. #1027
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    4687
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    32,883
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by MrTickle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    First off, David Doel's background of "scenic cliffs with ocean in the early evening" is obnoxious and distracting. Small nitpick, but it's just dumb that this guy has to put himself in front of scenery during his show. Oddly, he has a neutral background to start, then switches to the cliffs for no reason once AOC comes on. It doesn't even fit well with the show's theme (instead of, say, a background of downtown-looking buildings at night during a talk show.)

    Anyway, clearly someone wrote that speech for AOC, and clearly whoever wrote it thought they were really cleverl. And clearly you, Mumbles, and other leftists ate it up.

    However, what she said means very little. Not many Republicans argue that healthcare is a commodity, nor would recognizing its lack of being a commodity fix our country's healthcare problems.

    If anything, her point strengthens opposition to a Medicare For All system, as she states that "people will do anything to keep themselves alive", and that will become even more true when someone else is paying the bill. It will no longer just be "keeping yourself alive", but rather visiting the doctor on any whim or slight suspicion of a problem, because there's no cost to doing so. This will, in turn, lead to even higher costs, and tremendous waits to get care -- which we already see in existing socialized systems elsewhere.

    So, thanks AOC! You have helped make the case against socialized medicine without realizing it!
    Why do you think she couldn’t have written it herself? Is it because she’s a woman, or because she’s POC?
    Neither. I don't believe she wrote it herself because it sounded like a memorized speech, and as Chappy said, a lot of these politicians have staffers who write this type of stuff for them.

    I'm not saying AOC is the only one who does this. Even Trump, the king of off-the-cuff speech, sometimes reads prepared speeches written by others.

    However, politicians also don't deserve any credit if a "good speech" was actually written by a third party. My son Benjamin could have read the same speech, but nobody would confuse him for a commodities expert.

    My bigger issue, though, was that her speech was "answering" a point that nobody is really making.

  8. #1028
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    4687
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    32,883
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by verminaard View Post
    FWIW,

    Lower income people that qualify for free healthcare are actually significantly LESS likely to use medical services than people who pay for their healthcare, normally through insurance.

    Of course that is part of the problem, is that people don’t go to the doctor or get the tests when they should, and end up ignoring the problem too long and end up in emergency rooms and/or developing serious, very expensive medical issues.

    So Druff, you are right for all the wrong reasons.
    You're also right for the wrong reasons.

    It is true that low income people qualify for all kinds of free healthcare which, in many cases, is actually better than the healthcare I have. It's also true that, despite qualifying for this free care, they often ignore symptoms and don't go to the doctor until things become unbearable. And yes, sometimes that leads to higher overall costs for those patient, as treatable minor problems develop into expensive big ones.

    But that's not a good example you can extrapolate upon the general population. Lower income people also tend to be less educated, which also means they are less likely to have basic knowledge about when to worry about something and when to go to the doctor. Additionally, they often either lack the time or the ability to take off work to go to the doctor for what they perceive to be minor problems. When you get no sick pay, you tend to just tough things out, which isn't always a good thing. Or if you're a single mom on welfare with 3 young kids, you don't want to drag them all to the doctor, nor do you have an easy way to do so (especially if you have no car), so again you don't go for anything you perceive to be minor.

    Now, if we change our present healthcare model to where EVERYONE gets "free" healthcare, these issues will still persist for many low income people, but won't for the middle or higher classes. These people will go to the doctor for every slight perceived issue, and will never turn down an expensive test, because why bother saving the government money?

    I even know this firsthand. Let's say I wake up tomorrow with my knee hurting really badly, for unknown reasons. Do I run to the doctor? No. Do I get expensive tests on my knee? No. Why? Among other reasons, I don't want to waste the money on something which will likely get better on its own.

    Simply put, there's a reason that there's an 18-week wait for non-urgent tests and specialist visits in the UK. Laughably, an excuse is peddled that this is a good thing, because the 18 week wait allows people to cancel the appointment if they get better on their own in that time, thus saving the system money! LOL! But what about those who don't get better in that 18-week period? Have fun dealing with whatever ails you for 4 months before even being seen. That's not the "upgrade" to our healthcare system I want to see!

  9. #1029
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by verminaard View Post
    FWIW,

    Lower income people that qualify for free healthcare are actually significantly LESS likely to use medical services than people who pay for their healthcare, normally through insurance.

    Of course that is part of the problem, is that people don’t go to the doctor or get the tests when they should, and end up ignoring the problem too long and end up in emergency rooms and/or developing serious, very expensive medical issues.

    So Druff, you are right for all the wrong reasons.
    You're also right for the wrong reasons.

    It is true that low income people qualify for all kinds of free healthcare which, in many cases, is actually better than the healthcare I have. It's also true that, despite qualifying for this free care, they often ignore symptoms and don't go to the doctor until things become unbearable. And yes, sometimes that leads to higher overall costs for those patient, as treatable minor problems develop into expensive big ones.

    But that's not a good example you can extrapolate upon the general population. Lower income people also tend to be less educated, which also means they are less likely to have basic knowledge about when to worry about something and when to go to the doctor. Additionally, they often either lack the time or the ability to take off work to go to the doctor for what they perceive to be minor problems. When you get no sick pay, you tend to just tough things out, which isn't always a good thing. Or if you're a single mom on welfare with 3 young kids, you don't want to drag them all to the doctor, nor do you have an easy way to do so (especially if you have no car), so again you don't go for anything you perceive to be minor.

    Now, if we change our present healthcare model to where EVERYONE gets "free" healthcare, these issues will still persist for many low income people, but won't for the middle or higher classes. These people will go to the doctor for every slight perceived issue, and will never turn down an expensive test, because why bother saving the government money?

    I even know this firsthand. Let's say I wake up tomorrow with my knee hurting really badly, for unknown reasons. Do I run to the doctor? No. Do I get expensive tests on my knee? No. Why? Among other reasons, I don't want to waste the money on something which will likely get better on its own.

    Simply put, there's a reason that there's an 18-week wait for non-urgent tests and specialist visits in the UK. Laughably, an excuse is peddled that this is a good thing, because the 18 week wait allows people to cancel the appointment if they get better on their own in that time, thus saving the system money! LOL! But what about those who don't get better in that 18-week period? Have fun dealing with whatever ails you for 4 months before even being seen. That's not the "upgrade" to our healthcare system I want to see!
    Ok. I accept that our system pre-selects people for free health care that are less likely to actually use it. But I also suspect some of this is general human psychology, and will occur in the middle and upper classes even if health care is socialized. And I am very skeptical your reasoning for why wait times are so long in England (people are abusing the system because it is free) is accurate, but maybe it is. I don't know.
    I smoke color purple
    I'm up in here feeling like silly
    Nappy ass dreads, what's that you say?
    Watch your mouth, Milli Vanilli
    You can get snaked, you can get faked
    I'll buy the bitch that you feeling
    'Cause you thought that she was an angel
    That bitch ain't no angel, I treat her halo like a Frisbee

  10. #1030
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    4687
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    32,883
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by verminaard View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    You're also right for the wrong reasons.

    It is true that low income people qualify for all kinds of free healthcare which, in many cases, is actually better than the healthcare I have. It's also true that, despite qualifying for this free care, they often ignore symptoms and don't go to the doctor until things become unbearable. And yes, sometimes that leads to higher overall costs for those patient, as treatable minor problems develop into expensive big ones.

    But that's not a good example you can extrapolate upon the general population. Lower income people also tend to be less educated, which also means they are less likely to have basic knowledge about when to worry about something and when to go to the doctor. Additionally, they often either lack the time or the ability to take off work to go to the doctor for what they perceive to be minor problems. When you get no sick pay, you tend to just tough things out, which isn't always a good thing. Or if you're a single mom on welfare with 3 young kids, you don't want to drag them all to the doctor, nor do you have an easy way to do so (especially if you have no car), so again you don't go for anything you perceive to be minor.

    Now, if we change our present healthcare model to where EVERYONE gets "free" healthcare, these issues will still persist for many low income people, but won't for the middle or higher classes. These people will go to the doctor for every slight perceived issue, and will never turn down an expensive test, because why bother saving the government money?

    I even know this firsthand. Let's say I wake up tomorrow with my knee hurting really badly, for unknown reasons. Do I run to the doctor? No. Do I get expensive tests on my knee? No. Why? Among other reasons, I don't want to waste the money on something which will likely get better on its own.

    Simply put, there's a reason that there's an 18-week wait for non-urgent tests and specialist visits in the UK. Laughably, an excuse is peddled that this is a good thing, because the 18 week wait allows people to cancel the appointment if they get better on their own in that time, thus saving the system money! LOL! But what about those who don't get better in that 18-week period? Have fun dealing with whatever ails you for 4 months before even being seen. That's not the "upgrade" to our healthcare system I want to see!
    Ok. I accept that our system pre-selects people for free health care that are less likely to actually use it. But I also suspect some of this is general human psychology, and will occur in the middle and upper classes even if health care is socialized. And I am very skeptical your reasoning for why wait times are so long in England (people are abusing the system because it is free) is accurate, but maybe it is. I don't know.
    Why are you skeptical?

    Have you ever needed an MRI or CT Scan? Ever seen the cost of those, even after insurance covers part of it?

    Unless you're either really rich or don't care about money, those tests (and many others) require a decision as to whether or not it's worth doing. But if it's "free"? What do you have to lose (well, except for cancer from too many CT scans!)

    Even with office visit co-pays, which can now be has high as $70 for specialists, one must consider if it's worth it, especially if currently struggling for cash.

    It's a very basic principle of economics. People love free shit, and the lack of financial deterrent will cause overutilization. Think of a buffet, as another good example. You see something which looks mediocre and you'd never order if it were to cost money individually, but if it costs you nothing, might as well try it, right?

  11. #1031
    Gold MrTickle's Avatar
    Reputation
    357
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    1,303
    Quote Originally Posted by DJ_Chaps View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrTickle View Post

    Why do you think she couldn’t have written it herself? Is it because she’s a woman, or because she’s POC?

    BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE HAVE WRITERS, SO SPARE US OUR SJW RHETORIC.
    Bizarre to criticise a politician for not writing their own speech when everyone does it. Unless they’re a woman or POC of course

  12. #1032
    100% Organic MumblesBadly's Avatar
    Reputation
    -148
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    In the many threads of this forum
    Posts
    7,117
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MumblesBadly View Post
    First off, David Doel's background of "scenic cliffs with ocean in the early evening" is obnoxious and distracting. Small nitpick, but it's just dumb that this guy has to put himself in front of scenery during his show. Oddly, he has a neutral background to start, then switches to the cliffs for no reason once AOC comes on. It doesn't even fit well with the show's theme (instead of, say, a background of downtown-looking buildings at night during a talk show.)

    Anyway, clearly someone wrote that speech for AOC, and clearly whoever wrote it thought they were really cleverl. And clearly you, Mumbles, and other leftists ate it up.

    However, what she said means very little. Not many Republicans argue that healthcare is a commodity, nor would recognizing its lack of being a commodity fix our country's healthcare problems.

    If anything, her point strengthens opposition to a Medicare For All system, as she states that "people will do anything to keep themselves alive", and that will become even more true when someone else is paying the bill. It will no longer just be "keeping yourself alive", but rather visiting the doctor on any whim or slight suspicion of a problem, because there's no cost to doing so. This will, in turn, lead to even higher costs, and tremendous waits to get care -- which we already see in existing socialized systems elsewhere.

    So, thanks AOC! You have helped make the case against socialized medicine without realizing it!
    You seem to lack a basic grasp of what it means economically by saying that healthcare isn’t a commodity, and that the demand current is extremely inelastic. Let me sum it up for you: It means that free market competition will result in suppliers thoroughly gouging consumers, as supplier can charge whatever price they want that the consumer is *able* to afford.

    And because the US government *already* heavily regulates who can supply those services/products, and specifically does so in a manner that severely restricts the number of types of suppliers, the suppliers of healthcare in the US get insanely rich at the expense of everyone else, as evidenced by healthcare accounting for a much higher percentage of GDP than other major industrialized countries.

     
    Comments
      
      dwai: SHUT THE FUCK UP FAGGOT BITCH
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellafriend View Post
    There is only one scumbag here:


    ME

  13. #1033
    Quote Originally Posted by MumblesBadly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    First off, David Doel's background of "scenic cliffs with ocean in the early evening" is obnoxious and distracting. Small nitpick, but it's just dumb that this guy has to put himself in front of scenery during his show. Oddly, he has a neutral background to start, then switches to the cliffs for no reason once AOC comes on. It doesn't even fit well with the show's theme (instead of, say, a background of downtown-looking buildings at night during a talk show.)

    Anyway, clearly someone wrote that speech for AOC, and clearly whoever wrote it thought they were really cleverl. And clearly you, Mumbles, and other leftists ate it up.

    However, what she said means very little. Not many Republicans argue that healthcare is a commodity, nor would recognizing its lack of being a commodity fix our country's healthcare problems.

    If anything, her point strengthens opposition to a Medicare For All system, as she states that "people will do anything to keep themselves alive", and that will become even more true when someone else is paying the bill. It will no longer just be "keeping yourself alive", but rather visiting the doctor on any whim or slight suspicion of a problem, because there's no cost to doing so. This will, in turn, lead to even higher costs, and tremendous waits to get care -- which we already see in existing socialized systems elsewhere.

    So, thanks AOC! You have helped make the case against socialized medicine without realizing it!
    You seem to lack a basic grasp of what it means economically by saying that healthcare isn’t a commodity, and that the demand current is extremely inelastic. Let me sum it up for you: It means that free market competition will result in suppliers thoroughly gouging consumers, as supplier can charge whatever price they want that the consumer is *able* to afford.

    And because the US government *already* heavily regulates who can supply those services/products, and specifically does so in a manner that severely restricts the number of types of suppliers, the suppliers of healthcare in the US get insanely rich at the expense of everyone else, as evidenced by healthcare accounting for a much higher percentage of GDP than other major industrialized countries.
    he is right...(you decide just which "he" I am referring to; just trying to please everyone this time)
    Last edited by GrenadaRoger; 12-04-2019 at 07:39 PM.
    (long before there was a PFA i had my Grenade & Crossbones avatar at DD)

  14. #1034
    She saved NYC billions, billions.
    Amazon caved, they caved and did exactly what they were gonna do a yer ago, only w/out all the tax credits
    The ONLY thing she was complaining about.


    Tech giant agrees to take 335,000 square feet in Hudson Yards neighborhood in deal without any financial incentives from city or state


    Can't wait for Druff to NOT give her any credit for this, but go back to that she dances funny, because that is so important.
    Oh, and Ben Shapiro called her stupid for doing this.




    Amazon Leases New Manhattan Office Space, Less Than a Year After HQ2 Pullout


    https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-...ut-11575671243


     
    Comments
      
      dwai: nigger lover
      
      1marley1: Offset
      
      gimmick: double offset because that's what i said at the time
    Internet Trolls Are Narcissists, Psychopaths, and Sadists
    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...hs-and-sadists

  15. #1035
    Diamond big dick's Avatar
    Reputation
    1150
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    fuck krypt
    Posts
    7,723
    WOULD YOU FUCK HER JIMMY OR ARE YOU GAY?

     
    Comments
      
      Dan Druff: i'm about to demand an answer on this, as well

  16. #1036
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    4687
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    32,883
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by MumblesBadly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    First off, David Doel's background of "scenic cliffs with ocean in the early evening" is obnoxious and distracting. Small nitpick, but it's just dumb that this guy has to put himself in front of scenery during his show. Oddly, he has a neutral background to start, then switches to the cliffs for no reason once AOC comes on. It doesn't even fit well with the show's theme (instead of, say, a background of downtown-looking buildings at night during a talk show.)

    Anyway, clearly someone wrote that speech for AOC, and clearly whoever wrote it thought they were really cleverl. And clearly you, Mumbles, and other leftists ate it up.

    However, what she said means very little. Not many Republicans argue that healthcare is a commodity, nor would recognizing its lack of being a commodity fix our country's healthcare problems.

    If anything, her point strengthens opposition to a Medicare For All system, as she states that "people will do anything to keep themselves alive", and that will become even more true when someone else is paying the bill. It will no longer just be "keeping yourself alive", but rather visiting the doctor on any whim or slight suspicion of a problem, because there's no cost to doing so. This will, in turn, lead to even higher costs, and tremendous waits to get care -- which we already see in existing socialized systems elsewhere.

    So, thanks AOC! You have helped make the case against socialized medicine without realizing it!
    You seem to lack a basic grasp of what it means economically by saying that healthcare isn’t a commodity, and that the demand current is extremely inelastic. Let me sum it up for you: It means that free market competition will result in suppliers thoroughly gouging consumers, as supplier can charge whatever price they want that the consumer is *able* to afford.

    And because the US government *already* heavily regulates who can supply those services/products, and specifically does so in a manner that severely restricts the number of types of suppliers, the suppliers of healthcare in the US get insanely rich at the expense of everyone else, as evidenced by healthcare accounting for a much higher percentage of GDP than other major industrialized countries.
    Mumbles, first off, I already agreed with you that there's a doctor shortage and that reform is needed to put more doctors out there. So there's no point to keep throwing that as a point of response.

    However, "healthcare is not a commodity" doesn't address the fact that it's often not black-and-white whether one should go to the doctor and/or get expensive tests done. I like to bring up the knee pain example. Say I wake up today with knee pain. Do I see the doctor today? No, I wait to see if it gets better over the next 2 weeks or so. What if I do see the doctor right away, and he says he would need an MRI with a $550 co-pay for him to know anything? Do I spend that $550? Nope. I'll hold off for a few weeks to see if it gets better on its own.

    Now, in a socialized model, would any of these deterrents be in place? No, at least not financially. Nobody is going to say, "I don't want that possibly unnecessary MRI because it's going to cost the government too much money." They will see it as "free" and happily schedule it.

    This causes overutilization, which in turn makes the system more expensive AND causes staggeringly long waits to get non-emergency tests done and/or see specialists. This is why the UK NHS quotes an 18-week wait time for doing either one of these.

    These are economic decisions one makes regarding their healthcare, even if they can easily afford these co-pays. This is why the "commodity" argument fails. AOC assumes that it's never the correct decision to hold off on a doctor's visit, or to skip an unnecessary test. She thinks, "If someone wants medical services, we should remove all cost barriers and rubber stamp everything!"

    Now, I know you're going to say, "More expensive??? But the US has the most expensive system right now by far!"

    Yes, we do, because of the billing structure I talked about, which badly needs reform. A socialized system here would be both more expensive AND have those 4-month wait times.

    That's not an improvement. That would be a disaster.

  17. #1037
    100% Organic MumblesBadly's Avatar
    Reputation
    -148
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    In the many threads of this forum
    Posts
    7,117
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MumblesBadly View Post

    You seem to lack a basic grasp of what it means economically by saying that healthcare isn’t a commodity, and that the demand current is extremely inelastic. Let me sum it up for you: It means that free market competition will result in suppliers thoroughly gouging consumers, as supplier can charge whatever price they want that the consumer is *able* to afford.

    And because the US government *already* heavily regulates who can supply those services/products, and specifically does so in a manner that severely restricts the number of types of suppliers, the suppliers of healthcare in the US get insanely rich at the expense of everyone else, as evidenced by healthcare accounting for a much higher percentage of GDP than other major industrialized countries.
    Mumbles, first off, I already agreed with you that there's a doctor shortage and that reform is needed to put more doctors out there. So there's no point to keep throwing that as a point of response.

    However, "healthcare is not a commodity" doesn't address the fact that it's often not black-and-white whether one should go to the doctor and/or get expensive tests done. I like to bring up the knee pain example. Say I wake up today with knee pain. Do I see the doctor today? No, I wait to see if it gets better over the next 2 weeks or so. What if I do see the doctor right away, and he says he would need an MRI with a $550 co-pay for him to know anything? Do I spend that $550? Nope. I'll hold off for a few weeks to see if it gets better on its own.

    Now, in a socialized model, would any of these deterrents be in place? No, at least not financially. Nobody is going to say, "I don't want that possibly unnecessary MRI because it's going to cost the government too much money." They will see it as "free" and happily schedule it.

    This causes overutilization, which in turn makes the system more expensive AND causes staggeringly long waits to get non-emergency tests done and/or see specialists. This is why the UK NHS quotes an 18-week wait time for doing either one of these.


    These are economic decisions one makes regarding their healthcare, even if they can easily afford these co-pays. This is why the "commodity" argument fails. AOC assumes that it's never the correct decision to hold off on a doctor's visit, or to skip an unnecessary test. She thinks, "If someone wants medical services, we should remove all cost barriers and rubber stamp everything!"

    Now, I know you're going to say, "More expensive??? But the US has the most expensive system right now by far!"

    Yes, we do, because of the billing structure I talked about, which badly needs reform. A socialized system here would be both more expensive AND have those 4-month wait times.

    That's not an improvement. That would be a disaster.
    Japan has socialized medicine and a very high utilization rate (people tend to see the doctor quite often), and good health outcomes. But somehow, Japan spends much less on healthcare as a percent of GDP than the US. I wonder how they are able to do that.

     
    Comments
      
      dwai: SHUT THE FUCK UP FAGGOT BITCH
      
      limitles: Top top
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellafriend View Post
    There is only one scumbag here:


    ME

  18. #1038
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    4687
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    32,883
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
    Japan has socialized medicine and a very high utilization rate (people tend to see the doctor quite often), and good health outcomes. But somehow, Japan spends much less on healthcare as a percent of GDP than the US. I wonder how they are able to do that.


    It's not totally socialized, first of all. Aside from low-income patients, the typical patient pays 30% of the cost of care.

    Japan also has a unique system in that there are very few general practitioners, so almost all doctors are specialists. This makes it easier to see a specialist, but causes a huge problem when patients are suffering from multiple symptoms, to where they fear that any particular specialist won't be able to diagnose several of their symptoms. This causes patients to flock to hospitals (where there are tons of different specialists on staff), which clogs up the hospitals, and causes long wait times for everyone at hospitals. This also causes hospitals to turn people away who "don't seem sick enough" during busy times, and there have been tragic cases of people who have died because no hospital would see them, and it turned out they were erroneously refused service due to perceived lack of urgency.

    Japan spends less money than the US on healthcare because they don't have the terrible opaque/piecemeal billing system as seen here in the US -- something which would still exist if we switched to Medicare For All.

    Japan also has societal differences. Their diet, lifestyle, and genetics lead to a much lesser obesity issue than the US. They have much less of a drug and violent crime problem. These factors keep their life expectancy much higher, regardless of healthcare situation.

    Here's a good website which covers Japan's healthcare situation: https://www.internationalinsurance.c...tems/japan.php

  19. #1039
    100% Organic MumblesBadly's Avatar
    Reputation
    -148
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    In the many threads of this forum
    Posts
    7,117
    AOC Celebrates That “Amazon is Coming to NYC Anyway” Without Tax Incentives
    https://apple.news/A76-SBhMrQ5y1N8BL5baz0A


     
    Comments
      
      JimmyG_415: Amen
      
      dwai: SHUT THE FUCK UP FAGGOT BITCH
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellafriend View Post
    There is only one scumbag here:


    ME

  20. #1040
    and here is the tweet to offset the RW BS talking point that 'she cost NYC jobs'

    #1 when did the RW become so concerned w/NYers?
    # 2 There never was 2500 jobs.
    # 3 it was never supposed to be in her district,


     
    Comments
      
      dwai: nigger lover
      
      gimmick: offset
      
      MumblesBadly: So you also feel honored with a racist red rep from dwai? It means his little universe of hate is imploding in on him.
    Internet Trolls Are Narcissists, Psychopaths, and Sadists
    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...hs-and-sadists

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

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •