• 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!

Reid: More Funding Needed To Prevent ObamaCare From Becoming 'Train Wreck'

Joe Steel said:
Statistics prove you wrong. US health care almost always produces worse outcomes that most other industrialized countries. As I recall, just about the only thing the US does better than anyone else is treat some cancer.
Click to expand...

You are "Very Liberal", and typical of Liberals... very wrong. I used to be one... but an open mind an tons of travel helped extinguish that poison.

Have you lived in Europe or Canada? I have... for many years in both countries.

I'll give you an example of how pathetic the Canadian system is. A very close friend required an eye operation. She waited... and waited... and waited. Then they botched the operation. For 18-months she kept going to MD's, and finally one said... you do have a problem. She waited another 6-months for a corrective procedure. Too late. Her eye is feckt.

In the US she would have had an operation in less than a week. Correction to the problem would have been instant.

In the EU a buddy of mine is a GP. He couldn't make money in Germany. He was working for "points". All the schooling, all the investment, all the hard work and he was making less than a street cleaner. He moved to Switzerland and is cashing in as he should. It's a service... not some type of government widget to control.

Government has no business sticking their fingers in the pie of private enterprise... it's not their job, and when it becomes their job... well... hold your ankles because you're about to take a big and thick one.
 
Last edited:
zimmer said:
You are "Very Liberal", and typical of Liberals... very wrong. I used to be one... but an open mind an tons of travel helped extinguish that poison.

Have you lived in Europe or Canada? I have... for many years in both countries.

I'll give you an example of how pathetic the Canadian system is. A very close friend required an eye operation. She waited... and waited... and waited. Then they botched the operation. For 18-months she kept going to MD's, and finally one said... you do have a problem. She waited another 6-months for a corrective procedure. Too late. Her eye is feckt.

In the US she would have had an operation in less than a week. Correction to the problem would have been instant.

In the EU a buddy of mine is a GP. He couldn't make money in Germany. He was working for "points". All the schooling, all the investment, all the hard work and he was making less than a street cleaner. He moved to Switzerland and is cashing in as he should. It's a service... not some type of government widget to control.

Government has no business sticking their fingers in the pie of private enterprise... it's not their job, and when it becomes their job... well... hold your ankles because you're about to take a big and thick one.
Click to expand...

The plural of anecdote is not data.

By the way: our waiting times suck. Have you noticed how the waiting time argument always revolves around Canada or the UK? How come not Germany, Japan, Sweden, Iceland, Australia, or France? Because all of those countries have shorter waiting times than we do. Germany by a huge margin.
 
Deuce said:
The plural of anecdote is not data.

By the way: our waiting times suck. Have you noticed how the waiting time argument always revolves around Canada or the UK? How come not Germany, Japan, Sweden, Iceland, Australia, or France? Because all of those countries have shorter waiting times than we do. Germany by a huge margin.
Click to expand...

The Swedes have done their best to deconstruct the socialist hell they created. Once it was a backwater nation. Poor as dirt. Then they embraced Capitalism (I guess they didn't teach you that at your socialist indoctrination center (school) and grew to the 4th wealthiest nation. Then came the slide with Socialism. Their healthcare system is a holdover from those days and is awful. Finns too.

Iceland isn't really a nation, but a village of 200,000.

France? ROTFLOL... yes... one heat wave (normal south US summer temps) and 14,000 people died... because there were no doctors. When we have a heatwave... 600 might die, but not an entire town.

Care to try again?
 
the tiffany network, cbs, yesterday:

The Affordable Care Act will be fully implemented by Jan. 1, 2014. But right now, it's causing concern and anxiety for small business owners who say they don't understand how the new law works or how they're going to pay for it.

Hans Rockenwagner's bakery is known throughout Los Angeles for its artisan breads. But looming provisions in the new law have the small business owner worried about his company's future.

Rockenwagner said, "The employees are asking: How is this going to affect me? How do I need to budget myself?"

Because Rockenwagner employs more than 50 people, he is required by the law to offer health insurance or pay a fine every year of $2,000 per employee. Rockenwagner and other small business owners worry the cost to provide coverage could consume their profits. Rockenwagner says his annual costs would total around $300,000. But what's even worse: he says he can't make any decisions because the federal government is giving no guidance. "What are the rates?" Rockenwagner said. "Who are the carriers? Who's covered? Who's not?"

President Obama downplayed the concerns this week, saying, "Any time you are implementing something big, there's going to be people who are nervous and anxious about, is it going to get done, until it's actually done."

But it's not just business owners sounding the alarm. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., who helped write the massive health care bill, recently confronted the president's top adviser in charge of implementing the law. "I just see a huge train wreck coming down," Baucus told Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius at a hearing. "You and I have discussed this many times and I don't see any results yet."

And when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., was asked by a radio show caller, "What do you think about Senator Baucus calling it a train wreck?", Reid replied, "Max said unless we implement this properly it's going to be a train wreck and I agree with him."

Reid and administration officials say they need more money to develop detailed plans to help businesses. But as the deadline approaches, the public appears equally as confused. A new poll released by the Kaiser Family Foundation shows that 42 percent of Americans don't even realize the president's health care law is on the books and nearly six in 10 of the uninsured don't understand how it will impact them. People want answers, just like Rockenwagner, the small business owner.
Click to expand...

psst...

if you want answers, you're gonna have to hire toensing and digenova

can YOU answer reluctant mr rockenwagner's questions?

cbs can't

can sebelius?

baucus---chair of senate finance---to hhs' face says "choo choo!"

and i'm sure you've heard by now what schumer said:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...e_increased_in_part_because_of_obamacare.html

can you deny the administration's incompetence?

you need to get off now, you know how train wrecks end up
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
Numerous studies demonstrate that it those on Medicaid either have equal or poorer health than those without insurance at all.

Sort of. The only thing the US system does better than anyone else is provide healthcare, which translates into higher survival rates for diseases like cancer.
Click to expand...

Are you serious? Did you actually mean to post what you did?
 
zimmer said:
The Swedes have done their best to deconstruct the socialist hell they created. Once it was a backwater nation. Poor as dirt. Then they embraced Capitalism (I guess they didn't teach you that at your socialist indoctrination center (school) and grew to the 4th wealthiest nation. Then came the slide with Socialism. Their healthcare system is a holdover from those days and is awful. Finns too.

Iceland isn't really a nation, but a village of 200,000.

France? ROTFLOL... yes... one heat wave (normal south US summer temps) and 14,000 people died... because there were no doctors. When we have a heatwave... 600 might die, but not an entire town.

Care to try again?
Click to expand...

Sure; as soon as you give me something other than unsupported assertions.
 
I just got to love our politicians logic on Health Care

First: Pelosi : “But we have to pass the [health care] bill so that you can find out what’s in it....”

and now : "Reid warned the federal government is not spending enough money to implement the law..."

I imagine next, some will come out and say the govt has not taxed enough.

What we have is a spending and priority setting problem. IMO, the HCA was written too quickly and passed without a good review. What Obama calls bumps and hickups is more like the bill is a mess.
 
Joe Steel said:
Sure; as soon as you give me something other than unsupported assertions.
Click to expand...

Unsupported? You mean 14,000 people didn't die in Paris?
Iceland isn't much more than a village of 200,000 or so?
Sweden and Finland's healthcare isn't a problem due to socialism?
 
The Prof said:
uva (university of virginia), 2010

UVa Study: Surgical Patients On Medicaid Are 13% More Likely To Die Than Those Without Insurance

they don't call it the ghetto of health care for nothing
Click to expand...

From the linked blog posting:

The Virginia group evaluated 893,658 major surgical operations from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database from 2003 to 2007. They divided the patients up by the type of insurance—private insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, and uninsured—and adjusted the database in order to control for age, gender, income, geographic region, operation, and comorbid conditions (having 2 or more diseases simultaneously). That way, they could correct for the obvious differences in the patient populations (for example, older and poorer patients being more likely to have ill health).
Click to expand...

I'd like to know more about the adjustments. The results of the study are counter-intuitive and I suspect the adjustments are the reason.
 
zimmer said:
Unsupported? You mean 14,000 people didn't die in Paris?
Iceland isn't much more than a village of 200,000 or so?
Sweden and Finland's healthcare isn't a problem due to socialism?
Click to expand...

Yes. Make a well-supported argument. Show me how the 14,000 prove PPACA is a "train wreck."
 
Joe Steel said:
Train wreck?

I've been to train wrecks (literally, I've worked for railroads.) Want to know something about train wrecks? They get fixed. All the broken equipment and all the torn-up track gets fixed and put back together. Want to know something else? They happen because something was wrong in the first place. Want to know what it is? Free-market, profit-driven health care. It doesn't work. It serves too few, costs them too much and delivers poor outcomes. We're better-off without it but until that day comes, we can deal with a few train wrecks.

Free-market health care. That's no way to run a railroad.
Click to expand...

But, if you KNOW a train wreck is about to happen, wouldn't you do something to stop it? Surely, you wouldn't do things to CREATE the train wreck.

jus' sayin'
 
The study is debunked here
Click to expand...

let's see...

ya got the university of virginia on the one hand...

and david brock on the other

LOL!

whatever floats your boat, floyd

but tell david to quit beating up his boyfriend
 
Joe Steel said:
Yes. Make a well-supported argument. Show me how the 14,000 prove PPACA is a "train wreck."
Click to expand...

It seems 14,000 dead people doesn't reveal a catastrophic failure of a system.

Socialist schemes implode... always.
France's Health-Care System Is Going Broke
January 3, 2013

The health system exceeds its budget by billions of euros each year, and in the face of rising costs, taxpayer-funded benefits such as spa treatments, which the French have long justified as preventive care, now look more like expendable luxuries. “Reform is needed fast,” Hodin says. “The most optimistic believe this system can survive another five to six years. The less optimistic don’t think it will last more than three.”

The government projects the health-care system’s 2013 shortfall will be about €5.1 billion, down from €11.6 billion in 2010. Yet that forecast may be optimistic, since it’s based on the assumption that the economy will grow 0.8 percent—double the European Commission’s estimate. France’s system “is simply unaffordable, unsustainable, and the manner in which it’s financed is a huge burden on the economy,” says Nicholas Spiro, managing director of Spiro Sovereign Strategy in London. “The French are not being realistic.”

France's Health-Care System Is Going Broke - Businessweek
Click to expand...
 
ron fournier's natl journal thursday:

At Tuesday’s press conference, President Obama delivered an unfocused eight-minute defense of his central legislative accomplishment in office – the Affordable Care Act. In the face of intraparty criticism that implementation of his health care law will be a “train wreck,” new polls showing support for the law near all-time lows, and even the Democratic nominee in next week’s House special election calling the law “extremely problematic”– there’s plenty of evidence piling up to believe health care will be a political millstone for Democrats in 2014.

While the debate over Obama’s health care law isn’t a life-or-death battle, health care affects voter livelihood (and their voting decisions) like few other issues do. And there are clear signs that if premiums go up, businesses are forced to change how they insure their employees, and implementation of the law is uneven, the potential for political consequences are significant. In the 2010 midterms, Democrats suffered a historic landslide when the debate over health care was abstract. The stakes could be even higher when voters have first-hand experience with its effects.
Click to expand...

nyt here points out how even congress members and staff want an exemption from implementation

Lawmakers, aides may get Obamacare exemption - John Bresnahan and Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com

In both examples [Bush in Iraq and Obama chasing his white whale], the presidential sales pitch ended up being overhyped, with promises made that couldn’t realistically be achieved. Obama’s health care law was designed to expand access to the uninsured. But to win support for the law, Obama claimed it would lower costs, improve the quality of care and not force anyone off their current health care plan. That’s not shaping up to be the case. Premiums are rising, employer uncertainty is growing and voters aren’t viewing the law favorably – with many not even aware of the frontloaded benefits already in place. And even on the access side, the law of unintended consequences is kicking in: Some large retail companies are cutting back employee hours so they won’t have to offer health insurance. That’s not good for the economy or health care access.

Likewise, the advocates for repeal may now hold the upper hand politically, especially if there’s blowback as the health care law gets implemented. Every problem with health care, fairly or unfairly, will be blamed on Democrats. Like Republicans with Iraq, Democrats own the issue, and the headwinds coming with it in future elections.
Click to expand...

Obama's Legacy: A Health Care Law That Hurts His Party - NationalJournal.com

you don't look well...

maybe you'd rather talk about george bush?
 
Joe Steel said:
Are you serious? Did you actually mean to post what you did?
Click to expand...

:shrug: just the latest one that happens to be in the news:

Oregon Study: Medicaid 'Had No Significant Effect' On Health Outcomes vs. Being Uninsured

But as you dig back through, these studies pop up pretty consistently:

Is Having Medicaid Better Than Being Uninsured? Maybe Not.

But this trend is pretty much as old as government interference in the health market:

For example, one study that looked at old people before and immediately after the establishment of Medicare showed that putting the entire over-65 population on health insurance produced zero detectable improvement in their mortality rates.

Etc.
 
pre existing conditions insurance plan---just another broken rail on the max baucus express

states blindsided by dhs sebelius a week ago friday---the 100,000 americans currently covered by obamacare's early preexisting implementation will continued to be covered...

"up to a ceiling"

and you know what that means---people tossed out, costs up, care down...

in feb, for example, ms sebelius implemented a freeze on new app's

all this couldn't come at a worse time---the white house is working so hard to convince the states that it's a reliable partner

but here, already, after only our first date, we're dumped with the bill

this is what inevitably occurs when you make promises greater than the amount of money in circulation

barack the keynesian obama is gonna face in the next two years at least two dozen separate instances of you-lied-to-us tied to this ahab-like obsession he took us all on for 2 single minded years

you'll see

and many of those betrayals, like the one below, bring catastrophic consequences

States: 'Blindsided' by plan to shift costs of 'uninsurables' to them under ObamaCare | Fox News

worry
 
Joe Steel said:
The study is debunked here: Wash. Times Pushes Flawed Study On Medicaid To Attack Democrats' Health Care Policies
Click to expand...

1. It's Media Matters

2. Did you even read the article you linked? Because their "debunking" that I see basically boils down to two arguments: A) maybe it was something else but we have no evidence of that and B) well, Medicaid patients are sicker to begin with so it's not fair to compare.

Then they attempt to paint the authors as stating that the study is flawed but it turns out no, they don't, and they continue to stand by the conclusions. On the contrary, they cite six other studies which confirm their results that there is no credible evidence that Medicaid results in worse or equivalent health outcomes as being uninsured.



Look, I am one of the first to point out the flaws of the ad-sourcinem attack. Every source has a bias, and sources that acknowledge theirs are more honest than those that do not. But there are sources which cease to have ideological predispositions and begin to have partisan blinders. At that point, data takes second place to confirmation bias - and mediamatters leads that pack with that crowd. You might do better seeking other source material.
 
apdst said:
But, if you KNOW a train wreck is about to happen, wouldn't you do something to stop it? Surely, you wouldn't do things to CREATE the train wreck.

jus' sayin'
Click to expand...

Let's not force the analogy too far. The Republicans created the problems we have with PPACA. They obstructed and obfuscated the process of developing health care for all and they distorted and diverted its supporters efforts to create it. Don't blame the Democrats for whatever problems it faces. Blame the Republicans.
 
zimmer said:
It seems 14,000 dead people doesn't reveal a catastrophic failure of a system.

Socialist schemes implode... always.
Click to expand...

OK. France's system covers things of dubious therapeutic value and makes unrealistic assumptions. Do you think PPACA suffers from the same shortcomings?
 
Joe Steel said:
Train wreck?

I've been to train wrecks (literally, I've worked for railroads.) Want to know something about train wrecks? They get fixed. All the broken equipment and all the torn-up track gets fixed and put back together. Want to know something else? They happen because something was wrong in the first place. Want to know what it is? Free-market, profit-driven health care. It doesn't work. It serves too few, costs them too much and delivers poor outcomes. We're better-off without it but until that day comes, we can deal with a few train wrecks.

Free-market health care. That's no way to run a railroad.
Click to expand...

It hasn't been a free market for a long time, before the government got involved a doctor's house call was cheap. But by all means, make the common mistake of blaming the free market after the government ****s up a market in order to justify MORE government.
 
Joe Steel said:
Let's not force the analogy too far. The Republicans created the problems we have with PPACA. They obstructed and obfuscated the process of developing health care for all and they distorted and diverted its supporters efforts to create it. Don't blame the Democrats for whatever problems it faces. Blame the Republicans.
Click to expand...

The Democrats wrote, voted for it and Obama signed it, but it's jacked up because of the Republicans? Do you know how you sound right now?...LOL!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom