2012 Election

[f3lix]

Originally Posted by Fruitacious B

National Healthcare makes sense, and it has worked in pretty much every country that has it.

Meritless claim, especially without defining what "worked" means.

[Ironic Mustache]

^^ Also considering the vastly different economic climates it's worked in, as opposed to the U.S (capitalist).

[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by Beebs

Because we understand that it isn't selfish.

If you don't reward people for breakthroughs, with profit, there will be less breakthroughs.

Compare the discoveries by evil big pharma vs charity.

I'll take my life saving medicine thank you very much. How many lives have been saved by Western, profitable, "evil" pharma companies?

The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems

We're clearly not doing something that great.

[Der Fuhrer]

Yeah you should definitely believe everything the WHO says. I wonder what their criteria were for rating the countries? I'm sure there is considerable bias in favor of countries with nationalized healthcare.

You can't deny that when niggas want surgery, when niggas want a CT scan, when niggas want the best, most sophisticated medical technology available, niggas come to the US. Especially when niggas don't wanna wait six months.

[Ironic Mustache]

Holy crap, I googled, "wait list for surgery in Canada," and got like a billion hits of articles articles complaining, then googled "wait list for surgery in U.S." and STILL got a bill hits complaining about CANADA's wait list.

[Beebs]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems

We're clearly not doing something that great.

Look what they base it on though, most of it is not related to actual health care.

I know one thing, if you had to pick where to have a serious surgery done, the US would either win or come close to winning that choice.

Places like the Mayo Clinic don't happen in a NHS type system.

I get that it's a quality of care vs availability of care thing, but the WHO underweights quality of care, in my opinion.


I mean really, name the places you would actually have to have a life threatening illness in that are ranked higher than the US. Oman? Columbia? Really?

[Fruitacious B]

Originally Posted by f3lix

Meritless claim, especially without defining what "worked" means.

By 'worked' I meant...effective, useful, positive, sustainable, it has just plain worked. I'm not sure what is so meritless about it, just do a search of "Universal Healthcare Statistics". I'm not going to start posting any charts and whatnot, it's not going to accomplish anything.


Edit: Maybe I'm just bitter because I don't have insurance because it's too fucking expensive.

[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by Beebs

I mean really, name the places you would actually have to have a life threatening illness in that are ranked higher than the US. Oman? Columbia? Really?

Huge LOL at you naming 2 out of 36.

[Beebs]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

Huge LOL at you naming 2 out of 36.

Well sorry, I didn't feel like getting all of them. I picked the 2 most absurd in my mind.

Can you trust a list that has those 2 that high?

[Ironic Mustache]

Not looking good for Prop 19... Don't really understand it, but then, I didn't really understand why Prop 8 passed either.

"I'm against it!"

"Why?"

"I don't know it's just not right."

"No reason for that logic?"

"Not really, I just don't like it."

[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by Beebs

Well sorry, I didn't feel like getting all of them. I picked the 2 most absurd in my mind.

Can you trust a list that has those 2 that high?

Are you making this judgment by American stereotypes, or have you personally been to and experienced health care in those countries?

Jesus guys, I understand skepticism better than most, but who DO you trust to get your information from?

[f3lix]

I don't trust anything that can be influenced negatively by outside money.

[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by f3lix

I don't trust anything that can be influenced negatively by outside money.

That is everything. EVERYTHING!!!

Even libertarians, buddy.

[Mr. Blonde]

I think i'm really beginning to understand the root of F3lix's delusions.

YouTube - Only A Sith Deals In Absolutes

YouTube - Only A Sith Deals In Absolutes

[f3lix]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

That is everything. EVERYTHING!!!

Even libertarians, buddy.

You're starting to get it, bud.

[Mr. Blonde]

And you clearly don't, friendo. Your posting doesn't reflect what you'd like us to believe. You've had the Libertarians all up inside your asshole and loving it for years, and are adopting the Tea Party just because that's what they call themselves. At least I'm not claiming to trust nobody yet clearly showing the opposite.

[f3lix]

There are levels, Mr. Blonde. The longer a politician is in office, the more I do not trust him/her. The less time, the better. It's all about corruption. I want term limits to prevent these crooks from making a career out of it.

I support Libertarians because they want minimal government. It's hard to be too corrupt when you aren't stealing from everybody in America and calling it a "tax." Less and smaller government is less corrupt. Simple as that.

[Mr. Blonde]

They say they want minimal government, at least in the areas that help massive corporations, right? But how can you know for sure, if they can be negatively influenced by outside money? Like, oh, I don't know, THE MOTHERFUCKING KOCH BROTHERS???

Let's see how much minimal government they want in regard to "defense" spending.

By the way, one of your Teabaggers knocked out the only senator to vote against the Patriot Act, arguably one of the biggest government infringements on personal liberty in the history of the United States, so uh, thanks.

Cognitive dissonance is hard, buddy, I know.


Oh and please actually respond to the points I brought up, I actually want to know you aren't just putting your blinders on like the rest of America.

God dammit, F3lix. God dammit.

[f3lix]

Blonde, please outline which of your "questions" you'd like me to answer. I can't read your mind.

In response to how do I know what libs would do if elected... look at Ron Paul's voting record. Look at the myriad of libs who have won on the local level campaigning on the single idea of winning the election just to dismantle the useless office for which they are running, and then doing just as they said they would.

[f3lix]

How about the fed waving the middle finger at the newly elected tea partiers by announcing they'll "boost" the economy when it was doing just fine leading up to the election with people knowing they'd get some of their money back. Seriously. They fucking wait until election night to announce they'll do it and intervene the next morning. Fuck the fucking fed.

[angry pancake]

Anybody who doesn't think the healthcare system in the U.S. isn't fucked just isn't realistic. It's the most expensive in the world and I'd say not better.

From an employer perspective on health insurance:

It costs $1,528 per month, per employee, on my group plan for the employee + spouse. That's an 80-20 plan with a $5,000 deductible without maternity benefits or preventative. I pay half, the employee pays the other half. We're at the point where the cost of health insurance has exceeded the cost of rent for some employees. It's also over $550,000 per year in total premiums for 30 employees.

Just as a point of reference, it cost less to attend medical school in Texas (tuition and fees) than it does to pay for health insurance. It would also cost less to fly to Europe once per month and pay full tariff for routine healthcare and still have change left over. It would probably cost less to hire a private physician to work in the office (don't actually know this for sure, it's a complete guess).

Like Blonde, I've also been to a foreign hospital once and got sick another time. The trip in an ambulance, ER visit, and treatment was under $500 in Paris. My fucking ER co-pay is $500. Another time, while coming back from Spain, I caught some bad water and ended up with giardia or some shit. The trip to the private doc in Haarlem was 20 Euros, and the blister pack prescription was 2 Euros and change. Not generic shit either. Get home go see PCP in Fort Worth. pay the $30 co-pay, get the script for the medicine, and have a $60 co-pay. The other difference I'd point out. the hospital staff in Paris spoke better English than the Indian and Vietnamese staff in Arlington, Texas.

[Ironic Mustache]

Originally Posted by angry pancake

It costs $1,528 per month, per employee, on my group plan for the employee + spouse. That's an 80-20 plan with a $5,000 deductible without maternity benefits or preventative. I pay half, the employee pays the other half.

Just as a point of reference, it cost less to attend medical school in Texas (tuition and fees) than it does to pay for health insurance.

That's a little bold. In-state resident tuition at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center is $13,000 per year. That times four years is $52,000. If an employee pays half of $1,528 per month ($764), then the cost of going to medical school is the same as the cost of health insurance, over the course of 68 years for two people.

[Beebs]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

Are you making this judgment by American stereotypes, or have you personally been to and experienced health care in those countries?

Jesus guys, I understand skepticism better than most, but who DO you trust to get your information from?

I'm making common sense judgments. Health care is better in the US than fucking Oman, Costa Rica, the Dominican, et al. The health care "system" might not be based on the WHO's criteria, but the health care itself is.

Honestly, do you really believe you would rather have to have life saving surgery in those countries compared to the US?

[Fruitacious B]

I probably wouldn't want surgery in the latin american countries you've mentioned, but Europe? Sure. Canada? Yep.

[angry pancake]

Originally Posted by Ironic Mustache

That's a little bold. In-state resident tuition at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center is $13,000 per year. That times four years is $52,000. If an employee pays half of $1,528 per month ($764), then the cost of going to medical school is the same as the cost of health insurance, over the course of 68 years for two people.

No it's not. The premium itself $1528 x 12 = $18,336. Four years of premiums cost $73,334 at the current price. Even if the premiums were $764 that comes out to $9,168 per year. If I don't subsidize it, that's what it costs. And that is still more than the in state tuition of Baylor, Texas A&M, and almost the same for UT Houston. FWIW, UT Southwestern was $11,212 for 2008 when I looked it up. Then again the cost of premiums in 2008 was closer to a $1,000 per month.

By the way, $764 X 12 = $9,168/2 = $4,584 X 68 years = $311,712.