• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Obama Health Care Law

Helix said:
other countries are doing exactly what i advocate, and many of them rank above the US in quality of health care.

we're 37th : International Comparisons
Click to expand...


The UN rankings are flawed in that one of their criteria was socialized health care rather than actual stats on success. Also, you need to show us where there is a country as large as the US that has this employed without rationing, or going bankrupt because of it.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
The UN rankings are flawed in that one of their criteria was socialized health care rather than actual stats on success. Also, you need to show us where there is a country as large as the US that has this employed without rationing, or going bankrupt because of it.


j-mac
Click to expand...

He can't. Socialized medicine appeals to those who want to have others care for their lives.
 
conservativeguy said:
Except for the fact the Nation will be bankrupt since the entire BOCare scheme is an economic disaster with or without the mandate, nothing much will happen.
Click to expand...

Except for the fact that the best analysis available shows Health Care Reform reducing the defict by tens of billions of dollars. :lol:
 
MrVicchio said:
He can't. Socialized medicine appeals to those who want to have others care for their lives.
Click to expand...

Mostly it appeals to those who are tired of paying DOUBLE what other countries pay for the same health care.
 
I'm for healthcare reform and some kind of universal health care, but I do not support the current healthcare bill. Forcing people to buy insurance from private companies is a law that makes our nation a laughing stock of the western world.

What we need is reform that reduces the cost of healthcare, especially from the administrative end, and caps placed on the behaviors of insurance companies.

The piece of crap health care bill we currently have is one big hand off to the private sector. No thanks.
 
j-mac said:
The UN rankings are flawed in that one of their criteria was socialized health care rather than actual stats on success. Also, you need to show us where there is a country as large as the US that has this employed without rationing, or going bankrupt because of it.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Rationing is here already. Bankruptcy is an unexpected medical expense away for many families.
 
AdamT said:
Except for the fact that the best analysis available shows Health Care Reform reducing the defict by tens of billions of dollars. :lol:
Click to expand...


Oh I love it...the argument of the infallible once again...Notice the key phrases like "the best analysis".... What makes it "the Best?" What that it agrees with the agenda of Obama of course. pfft. What a joke.

Mostly it appeals to those who are tired of paying DOUBLE what other countries pay for the same health care.
Click to expand...

Is there a systemic problem with the cost of Health Care in this country? Yes. Is the Government the best solution to that? I think not.

j-mac
 
Helix said:
Rationing is here already. Bankruptcy is an unexpected medical expense away for many families.
Click to expand...

Why do you feel government is the answer to that?

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Why do you feel government is the answer to that?

j-mac
Click to expand...

essential services with inelastic demand are not efficiently delivered when the service providers, producers of materials, and insurance middlemen are all for-profit companies.
 
Helix said:
essential services with inelastic demand are not efficiently delivered when the service providers, producers of materials, and insurance middlemen are all for-profit companies.
Click to expand...

This is simply untrue. Competition brings efficiency up while keeping costs down, and that is a simple fact. But I notice you fail to address the question I asked you, and opt for the talking point....Do you have an answer?

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
This is simply untrue. Competition brings efficiency up while keeping costs down, and that is a simple fact. But I notice you fail to address the question I asked you, and opt for the talking point....Do you have an answer?

j-mac
Click to expand...

competition has not been a sufficient downward pressure on prices because health care is an essential service with inelastic demand. the service is being delivered by three levels of for-profit companies, and prices have risen exponentially. it's my opinion that we should scrap employer-based private health insurance and try something else before the costs rise further. and as i've previously posted, other countries that rank above us in quality of care are already doing this.
 
Helix said:
competition has not been a sufficient downward pressure on prices because health care is an essential service with inelastic demand. the service is being delivered by three levels of for-profit companies, and prices have risen exponentially. it's my opinion that we should scrap employer-based private health insurance and try something else before the costs rise further. and as i've previously posted, other countries that rank above us in quality of care are already doing this.
Click to expand...

It's also not a prime area for competition insofar as consumers lack the necessary data and education to make the best decisions. And of course insurance incents people NOT to price shop. If I need an MRI and my insurer is willing to pay $500 to have it done at hospital X, am I really going to shop around and find out that I could have gotten the same MRI for $150 at hospital Y? Not really.
 
j-mac said:
Beckel on the five this afternoon just laid out the talking point for the left concerning this decision. "If the court rules in favor of Obamacare, then they are deliberating properly and acting as they should, if they strike it down, then they are just hacks ruling politically rather than judicially like they should..."

Seriously folks. You just can't make this stuff up....



j-mac
Click to expand...

Is this kind of what "the Right," whoever they are, do when they whine about judicial activism?
 
j-mac said:
This is simply untrue. Competition brings efficiency up while keeping costs down, and that is a simple fact. But I notice you fail to address the question I asked you, and opt for the talking point....Do you have an answer?

j-mac
Click to expand...

Does it? Any chance there can be exceptions to rules?
 
Boo Radley said:
Does it? Any chance there can be exceptions to rules?
Click to expand...


Well, I do know that insurance has come about in the way it is used in merely my lifetime. Before that you need health care, you pay for it. It is called supporting yourself.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Well, I do know that insurance has come about in the way it is used in merely my lifetime. Before that you need health care, you pay for it. It is called supporting yourself.

j-mac
Click to expand...

You should investigate the history of health care. When that view was in reality, most health care was done at home. As technology improved, and treatments became more exopensive, fewer and fewer could afford the care. This led to the insurance industry seeking ways to help while making a profit, the free market. yes, government played a role as this moved forward, but the need came first. This is important to understand. Few things just happen without something leading to it happening. The free market did not lead to lower prices, but in fact to higher prices.
 
Boo Radley said:
You should investigate the history of health care. When that view was in reality, most health care was done at home. As technology improved, and treatments became more exopensive, fewer and fewer could afford the care. This led to the insurance industry seeking ways to help while making a profit, the free market. yes, government played a role as this moved forward, but the need came first. This is important to understand. Few things just happen without something leading to it happening. The free market did not lead to lower prices, but in fact to higher prices.
Click to expand...

It became more expensive when people started abusing it. Health Ins originally was a more catastrophic coverage kind of thing where routine visits were not covered. This helped keep pricing down for routine care. Now people use their coverage for the sniffles. It is actually a very clear problem that highlights what would be wrong with making HC accessible to the point you want it to be.


j-mac
 
MrVicchio said:
No, it shows how pathetic the voter base is, and exactly WHY Romney, despite the dreams of Progressives like yourself, will never BE the nominee.
Click to expand...

That is the final word from a Communist like yourself? :mrgreen:
 
danarhea said:
That is the final word from a Communist like yourself? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Your zing would have merit if I showed a propensity to communism in my posts.

However, you routinely back big government, big union solutions to lifes problems. A classic Progressive you are.
 
MrVicchio said:
Your zing would have merit if I showed a propensity to communism in my posts.

However, you routinely back big government, big union solutions to lifes problems. A classic Progressive you are.
Click to expand...

And you back big government, which limits the rights of the people to protest, favors the banks, and the one percent, which makes you a Communist...... Hmm, no it doesn't. It makes you a Fascist. Sieg Heil, good buddy. :mrgreen:
 
MrVicchio said:
Your zing would have merit if I showed a propensity to communism in my posts.

However, you routinely back big government, big union solutions to lifes problems. A classic Progressive you are.
Click to expand...

Ahh big unions that represent less than 15% of the population!
 
j-mac said:
It became more expensive when people started abusing it. Health Ins originally was a more catastrophic coverage kind of thing where routine visits were not covered. This helped keep pricing down for routine care. Now people use their coverage for the sniffles. It is actually a very clear problem that highlights what would be wrong with making HC accessible to the point you want it to be.
j-mac
Click to expand...

You say that as if it has never been tried. Problem is, virtually every other industrialized country has some form of nationalized health care, and they generally provide the same level of care for half the cost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom