• 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!

Obama's FY 2012 Budget

whysoserious said:
You must be on crack if you think anyone can get health care. They can go to free clinics for small issues and they can go to emergency rooms for major issues, but they are still screwed when it comes to medication and treatment. Hospitals aren't in the practice of giving away free heart transplants to people with no insurance.
Click to expand...

decent health care for the poor? ...sounds like "blood is a BIG expense"... from godfather 1.
 
Boo Radley said:
You mean any source that doesn't support your view is biased? I understand. ;)
Click to expand...

Wow.... coming from you, this is an incredulous statement based on your usual sources. Your sources included a lack of eye care and diabetes care, hardly a major concern. The last was an article from 2007 about a drop in volunteer doctors. None of your "sources" is relevant to the conversation.

Try again. Did you try your favorite source Wiki yet?
 
Boo Radley said:
:roll: :coffeepap
Click to expand...

Gill said:
Wow.... coming from you, this is an incredulous statement based on your usual sources. Your sources included a lack of eye care and diabetes care, hardly a major concern. The last was an article from 2007 about a drop in volunteer doctors. None of your "sources" is relevant to the conversation.

Try again. Did you try your favorite source Wiki yet?
Click to expand...
:yt :doh :lamo ...................................... told ya so.
 
Boo Radley said:
You know, a rose by any other name, or in this case, a problem by any other name. That you choose to ignore the issue and play gamse speaks to you and little more.
Click to expand...

the problem is that medicaid is even worse---longer stays, higher costs, greater mortality

ASA: ASA 130th Annual Meeting Abstracts - Primary Payer Status Affects Mortality For Major Surgical Operations

obamacare makes medicaid (and medicare) access all the more strained

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/business/retirementspecial/02health.html

Governors balk over what healthcare bill will cost states - The Boston Globe

reality---deal with it
 
and there ya go

The GOP-led House voted today to block funding to implement the nation's health care law.

The action came on several amendments to a must-pass spending bill that would pay for government operations from March through September.

Specifically, the House voted to prohibit any funds be used by the Internal Revenue Service to carry out the law's mandate that Americans buy health insurance. The individual mandate, one of the law's key tenets, has been struck down by federal courts.

The House also adopted an amendment by Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont., to bar the Labor and Health and Human Services Departments from spending any money for the rest of fiscal year 2011 on the health care law. Still another provision adopted today would ban the government from paying the salaries of any federal employee involved in implementing the health care law.

Senate Democrats, who blocked a GOP effort last month to repeal the health care law, will try to remove these provisions when the spending bill goes to their chamber after the Presidents Day recess. President Obama has vowed to veto the House bill, which seeks to cut at $61 billion in federal spending for this year.
Click to expand...

House blocks funding for health care law - On Politics: Covering the US Congress, Governors, and the 2012 Election - USATODAY.com

the only question remaining is---will obama SHUT DOWN the govt?

because all the pros can tell you senators mccaskill, manchin, webb, nelson, nelson, conrad, bingaman, lieberman, tester, et al, sure won't

as a matter of fact, bingaman today announced he won't be running in '12, no surprise

why do you think the senior senator from new mexico is quitting?

there's your landscape---fluttering butterflies are just gonna be forced to deal with it
 
Last edited:
Gill said:
Wow.... coming from you, this is an incredulous statement based on your usual sources. Your sources included a lack of eye care and diabetes care, hardly a major concern. The last was an article from 2007 about a drop in volunteer doctors. None of your "sources" is relevant to the conversation.

Try again. Did you try your favorite source Wiki yet?
Click to expand...

Hardly a major concern? Let me know when you need that care and don't have it, and then we'll discuss how major it is. And notice you use of the word includes. Yes, it includes but is not limtied to those two.
 
Boo Radley said:
Hardly a major concern?
Click to expand...

the real concern is patients whose primary payer is medicaid fare worse---longer stays, higher costs, greater mortality---than americans with NO INSURANCE

and that's before obamacare expands the ghetto of health care by 16 million---unfunded

get real
 
The Prof said:
the real concern is patients whose primary payer is medicaid fare worse---longer stays, higher costs, greater mortality---than americans with NO INSURANCE

and that's before obamacare expands the ghetto of health care by 16 million---unfunded

get real
Click to expand...

Fair worse? You mean as a population, they tend to be sicker. That has nothing to do with the system with which their care is pauid for. Every study casual relationships?
 
The Prof said:
you don't know what you're talking about

ASA: ASA 130th Annual Meeting Abstracts - Primary Payer Status Affects Mortality For Major Surgical Operations
Click to expand...

Link didn't work.

However, let me help:

RESULTS: Overall response rate of 22% (175/835), 153 US, 22 Canadian. US and Canadian respondents predicted a higher quality of care for both emergency (66 and 36%, respectively) and elective conditions (47 and 9%) under a single payer. Both groups recognized delays for elective surgery. Better access to surgical care under a single payer, seen by most Canadians (81%), was not predicted among Americans (44%, p = 0.00012). Americans (68%) did not believe a single payer would address workforce shortages, while Canadians (68%) disagreed (p = 0.00001). Both groups agree (p = 0.7) that personal income is decreased.

CONCLUSIONS: US surgeons anticipate benefits and problems that Canadian surgeons with direct experience with a single payer do not experience. This discrepancy must be recognized during the ongoing debate over the future of US health care.

Single payer health insurance in pediatric surgery... [Pediatr Surg Int. 2011] - PubMed result
 
we're not talking single payer

in america single payer is a fantasy

it's very presumptuous, ie, disrespectful of you to talk to me about your fantasies, as if i'd be interested

it's OBAMACARE that's the issue here in reality

in AMERICA those with NO INSURANCE fare better---costs, stays, mortality---than folks on medicaid, the ghetto of health care

From 2003-2007, 893,658 major surgical operations were evaluated using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database: lung resection, esophagectomy, colectomy, pancreatectomy, gastrectomy, abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, hip replacement, and coronary artery bypass. Patients were stratified by primary payer status: Medicare (n=491,829), Medicaid (n=40,259), Private Insurance (n=337,535), and Uninsured (n=24,035). Multivariate regression models were applied to assess outcomes.
Results: After controlling for age, gender, income, geographic region, operation, and 30 comorbid conditions, Medicaid payer status was associated with the longest length of stay, highest total costs and highest in-hospital mortality.
Click to expand...

ASA: ASA 130th Annual Meeting Abstracts - Primary Payer Status Affects Mortality For Major Surgical Operations

and OBAMACARE makes it much, much WORSE

obamacare massively expands medicaid with no funding

please don't talk to me about the stuff in your imagination, it's insufferable
 
The Prof said:
we're not talking single payer

in america single payer is a fantasy

it's very presumptuous, ie, disrespectful of you to talk to me about your fantasies, as if i'd be interested

it's OBAMACARE that's the issue here in reality

in AMERICA those with NO INSURANCE fare better---costs, stays, mortality---than folks on medicaid, the ghetto of health care



ASA: ASA 130th Annual Meeting Abstracts - Primary Payer Status Affects Mortality For Major Surgical Operations

and OBAMACARE makes it much, much WORSE

obamacare massively expands medicaid with no funding

please don't talk to me about the stuff in your imagination, it's insufferable
Click to expand...

Medicaid and medicare are not equal to a single payer system. Do keep that in mind. And nothing in what you show suggests the payer is the problem. Note this from your source, that mideicaid had the greatest length of stay. Could it be that they are sicker, take less care of themselves? You have a system right now where we try to undercut such care. Politiicans try to short the program, making it difficult to get care for the most at risk population. A single payer system would include everyone and not just the high risk patients. Do keep this in mind.
 
Boo Radley said:
Note this from your source, that mideicaid had the greatest length of stay. Could it be that they are sicker, take less care of themselves?
Click to expand...

From 2003-2007, 893,658 major surgical operations were evaluated using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database: lung resection, esophagectomy, colectomy, pancreatectomy, gastrectomy, abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, hip replacement, and coronary artery bypass. Patients were stratified by primary payer status: Medicare (n=491,829), Medicaid (n=40,259), Private Insurance (n=337,535), and Uninsured (n=24,035). Multivariate regression models were applied to assess outcomes.
Results: After controlling for age, gender, income, geographic region, operation, and 30 comorbid conditions, Medicaid payer status was associated with the longest length of stay, highest total costs and highest in-hospital mortality.
Click to expand...

unbelievable
 
Boo Radley said:
Medicaid and medicare are not equal to a single payer system.
Click to expand...

Could you please point out how they are different? To my knowledge liberals used Medicare as a template in the early stages of the HC battle, at one point even saying that they should expand it to cover all and be done with it.....So tell me how they are different.


j-mac
 
Boo Radley said:
I agree.
Click to expand...

that's nice

after controlling for age, gender, income, geographic region, operation, and 30 comorbid conditions, the asa finds that americans with NO INSURANCE experience shorter stays, lower costs and reduced mortality rates relative to folks whose primary payer status is medicaid

you don't know what you're talking about
 
I'm actually considering voting for Obama in 2012. The Democrats will get us to our goal of bankruptcy quicker than Republicans. Republicans will get us there, sure, but I'd rather just get it over with and maybe people will realize that you can't operate in debt space and be successful.
 
dadrone said:
I'm actually considering voting for Obama in 2012. The Democrats will get us to our goal of bankruptcy quicker than Republicans. Republicans will get us there, sure, but I'd rather just get it over with and maybe people will realize that you can't operate in debt space and be successful.
Click to expand...

So you want the US to go bankrupt?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
So you want the US to go bankrupt?

j-mac
Click to expand...

Not at all. The national debt is by far my biggest issue. But it seems inevitable as Republicrats continue to provide handouts for their supporters.
 
dadrone said:
Not at all. The national debt is by far my biggest issue. But it seems inevitable as Republicrats continue to provide handouts for their supporters.
Click to expand...


I see. Ok then, carry on.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Could you please point out how they are different? To my knowledge liberals used Medicare as a template in the early stages of the HC battle, at one point even saying that they should expand it to cover all and be done with it.....So tell me how they are different.


j-mac
Click to expand...

You're knowledge is limit is appears. Medicare only serves the most likely to need care. Same with Medicad. This makes them a high risk grouping. It would be like an insurance company only having those who need care, with few to no well people contributing. Add to it all the efforts to short change the programs. In a single payer system all people would pay premiums. This enlarges the pool. Also, the added benefit of removing it from business, allowing them better able to compete with the rest of the world.

BTW, considering all they tackle, medicare does very well. I beleuive there was a chart some time go showing that Medicare got more for the dollar than our insurance companies do. Just saying . . . :coffeepap
 
Boo Radley said:
You're knowledge is limit is appears.
Click to expand...

characteristically incoherent

Medicare only serves the most likely to need care.
Click to expand...

medicare serves ALL americans over the age of 65

you don't know what you're talking about

I beleuive there was a chart some time go showing that Medicare got more for the dollar than our insurance companies do.
Click to expand...

a chart---LOL!

asa study found that after controlling for age, gender, geography, 30 comorbid conditions and all other controllable parameters, medicare got WHALLOPED by those whose primary payer status is a private insurer

you don't know what you're talking about
 
All Americans over 65. Over sixty five is a high risk group.
 
Boo Radley said:
You're knowledge is limit is appears. Medicare only serves the most likely to need care. Same with Medicad.
Click to expand...

Boo Radley said:
All Americans over 65. Over sixty five is a high risk group.
Click to expand...


You're contradicting yourself again Boo. Which is it - Medicare and Medicaid is only serves the most likely to need care or does Medicare serve everyone over 65? Somehow a mistake on something so benign and basic on your part isn't doing much for your argument or credibility on this subject. I think it's time you :surrender
 
Ockham said:
You're contradicting yourself again Boo. Which is it - Medicare and Medicaid is only serves the most likely to need care or does Medicare serve everyone over 65? Somehow a mistake on something so benign and basic on your part isn't doing much for your argument or credibility on this subject. I think it's time you :surrender
Click to expand...

This is not rocjet science. Everyone over 65 is a high risk group, most likely to need care. The mistake is on your part, as you don't seem to understand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom