patrick.net

Those stinkin' taxes. I hate how they are used for useless things like paying for freeways, bridges, stop lights, schools, and so on

edvard2 says

Those stinkin' taxes. I hate how they are used for useless things like paying for freeways, bridges, stop lights, schools, and so on

yeah except these taxes pay for none of that. They only go straight to the medical industry stocks that those bastard in Washington are heavily invested in, from their inside knowledge. If Martha Stewart was half as guilty as those bastards, she would have burned in the electric chair.

GraooGra says

Why we are going this same bad road the other countries went?

If only!

On paper, the best strategy might be to buy gold and 'hide it' so you can qualify for free emergency room care, and be 'judgement proof' when they bill you 300k for a routine procedure that takes 2 days in the hospital.

Its been happening for years really its called 'asset protection strategy' or something like that. (living will in your kids name, family trusts,etc)

Expect attorneys to make good money helping people 'look poor' on paper to the predatory government.

robertoaribas says

you mean like ALL OTHER DEVELOPED COUNTRIES, that cover more of their population, and charge less for health care? those countries?

Ahhhhh! Stop speaking common sense! It hurts my ears!

robertoaribas says

you mean like ALL OTHER DEVELOPED COUNTRIES, that cover more of their population, and charge less for health care?

That's your problem right there. Always comparing the US to a bunch of other countries with even higher unemployment rates and worse economies. We should be comparing ourselves against places with really low unemployment when looking for ways to make improvements.

PockyClipsNow says

On paper, the best strategy might be to buy gold and 'hide it' so you can qualify for free emergency room care, and be 'judgement proof' when they bill you 300k for a routine procedure that takes 2 days in the hospital.

That would be great until you need to sell the gold and get a 1099. Then the paper trail leads right to your door.

Rin says

If NASA can lay off 4K engineers, along with any other company/institute which offshores R&D, I don't see why we can't re-train these fellows to be physician's assistants in record time.

Education costs in US are kind of high due to the union demands. So no retraining is likely to occur. And I have no idea if insurance companies have to cover non citizens after this legislation... do they?

zzyzzx says

That's your problem right there. Always comparing the US to a bunch of other countries with even higher unemployment rates and worse economies.

But the undeniable fact is that pretty much all of those "other" countries have a higher life expectancy overall compared to the US. That some might have higher unemployment isn't the point.

zzyzzx says

robertoaribas says

you mean like ALL OTHER DEVELOPED COUNTRIES, that cover more of their population, and charge less for health care?

That's your problem right there. Always comparing the US to a bunch of other countries with even higher unemployment rates and worse economies. We should be comparing ourselves against places with really low unemployment when looking for ways to make improvements.

If the homeowner isn't insulted by your offer...you didn't bid low enough!!!

What, countries like Norway (3%), Switzerland (3.1%), Japan (4.5%), Israel (5%), Germany (5.4%)? Sure; which of those countries should our health care system be more like?

zzyzzx says

That's your problem right there. Always comparing the US to a bunch of other countries with even higher unemployment rates and worse economies. We should be comparing ourselves against places with really low unemployment when looking for ways to make improvements.

So you are saying places like Canada, NZ, Chile, the whole middle east, Sweden, Norway, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland, etc., etc., etc. have higher unemployment and worse economies than the US? News to me. Are you sure?

zzyzzx says

CaptainShuddup says

Even retirees are required to pay most of their pension to the premiums.

I think this is the main point here.

If the homeowner isn't insulted by your offer...you didn't bid low enough!!!

I don't think this is true. The medical benefit ratio is capped isn't it at around 80% meaning the insurance companies have to spend 80% (or whatever the number is) towards medical benefits or repay the premium back to the individuals.

bdrasin says

What, countries like Norway (3%), Switzerland (3.1%), Japan (4.5%), Israel (5%), Germany (5.4%)? Sure; which of those countries should our health care system be more like?

If you are going to have socialized medicine, here is how to do it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Singapore

A key principle of Singapore's national health scheme is that no medical service is provided free of charge, regardless of the level of subsidy, even within the public healthcare system. This mechanism is intended to reduce the overutilisation of healthcare services, a phenomenon often seen in fully subsidised universal health insurance systems.

Approximately 70-80% of Singaporeans obtain their medical care within the public health system. Overall government spending on healthcare amounts to only 3-4% of annual GDP, partly because government expenditure on healthcare in the private system is extremely low.

I think in the US it's at least 16% GDP in healthcare.

http://www.singstat.gov.sg/
Unemployment Rate (SA) was 2.1% in Mar 2012

Imitating the failed economies of Europe is not a good idea.

msilenus says

Roberts' opinion said that it "could be construed" as a tax. Further, that he was precedent-bound to consider all possible constructions in order to save the legislation.

To put it another way, the court ruled 8-1 that it wasn't a tax. 1 Justice ruled that it was a tax and therefore was constitutional; 4 Justices ruled it wasn't a tax, but was constitutional; 4 Justices ruled that it wasn't a tax and was unconstitutional.

The difference is not that important to me, but if you want to make a big deal out of it then there you are. At least its a tax that is not intended to apply to anyone since the goal is for everyone to get insurance.

bdrasin says

What, countries like Norway (3%), Switzerland (3.1%), Japan (4.5%), Israel (5%), Germany (5.4%)? Sure; which of those countries should our health care system be more like?

Greece and Spain have over 20% unemployment, France 12%, Portugal 15%, Ireland 14-15%,

zzyzzx says

bdrasin says

What, countries like Norway (3%), Switzerland (3.1%), Japan (4.5%), Israel (5%), Germany (5.4%)? Sure; which of those countries should our health care system be more like?

Greece and Spain have over 20% unemployment, France 12%, Portugal 15%, Ireland 14-15%,

If the homeowner isn't insulted by your offer...you didn't bid low enough!!!

Great, we shouldn't try to be like the countries with high unemployment, we should try to be like the countries with low unemployment. Again, which of them has a health care system most like what you'd like to see here?

edvard2 says

Those stinkin' taxes. I hate how they are used for useless things like paying for freeways, bridges, stop lights, schools, and so on

--------------------------
Those stinkin' liars. I hate how they lie to our faces to take over 1/6th of our economy, shred the constitution, to give free healthcare to the useless, on the backs of the working-middle class.

zzyzzx says

A key principle of Singapore's national health scheme

A key principle of Singapore's healthcare scheme is they outlaw things that are bad for your health and everyone is skinny and relatively healthy genetically...

vs. our fat ass US fast food eating / smoking / drinking US culture.

We'll never reach Singapore levels of GDP expenditures with our diet/ US excess culture.

zzyzzx says

bdrasin says

What, countries like Norway (3%), Switzerland (3.1%), Japan (4.5%), Israel (5%), Germany (5.4%)? Sure; which of those countries should our health care system be more like?

If you are going to have socialized medicine, here is how to do it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Singapore

I don't know anything about Singapore, but I'm sure whatever they have is better than what we have here, with or without ACA.

"Approximately 70-80% of Singaporeans obtain their medical care within the public health system" - wow, that's far more socialistic than anything in ACA.

Also I see that 10 of 23 hospitals in Singapore are run by the government.

AverageBear says

Those stinkin' liars. I hate how they lie to our faces to take over 1/6th of our economy, shred the constitution, to give free healthcare to the useless, on the backs of the working-middle class.

AverageBear - decider of whose life is important and whose is not. :)

I suppose you are completely self sustaining yourself, right? You depend on nothing from the government (water, electricity, food, security, transportation ... etc.). You also benefit from nothing the government provides. Right?

"Take over 1/6th of our economy" == "provide laws, security, transportation, so that society can function and the economy can flourish"

I don't disagree with the fact that Government is wasteful and inefficient. Then again, so are a lot of things, especially those engineered by man.

zzyzzx says

bdrasin says

What, countries like Norway (3%), Switzerland (3.1%), Japan (4.5%), Israel (5%), Germany (5.4%)? Sure; which of those countries should our health care system be more like?

If you are going to have socialized medicine, here is how to do it:

Also, from the way you put this I take it you do NOT think we should have "socialized medicine". So, which developed, low-unemployment country DO you think our health care system should be like?

AverageBear says

Those stinkin' liars. I hate how they lie to our faces to take over 1/6th of our economy, shred the constitution, to give free healthcare to the useless, on the backs of the working-middle class.

Yeah, At least Democrats don't do stuff like that....

AverageBear says

edvard2 says

Those stinkin' taxes. I hate how they are used for useless things like paying for freeways, bridges, stop lights, schools, and so on

--------------------------
Those stinkin' liars. I hate how they lie to our faces to take over 1/6th of our economy, shred the constitution, to give free healthcare to the useless, on the backs of the working-middle class.

Hmmm, who is sounding like they support Death Panels now...... BTW is that the "working middle class" that Bush totally gutted? That's the one you care about now?!? /golfclap

I think the Libs only levied this tax on us because we wouldn't give them a God damn Choo Choo Train.

I just farted.

CaptainShuddup says

I think the Libs only levied this tax on us because we wouldn't give them a God damn Choo Choo Train.

I always thought CaptainSuddup was Ruki/Shrek. Here we go with the choo choo thing again.

bdrasin says

zzyzzx says

bdrasin says

What, countries like Norway (3%), Switzerland (3.1%), Japan (4.5%), Israel (5%), Germany (5.4%)? Sure; which of those countries should our health care system be more like?

If you are going to have socialized medicine, here is how to do it:

Also, from the way you put this I take it you do NOT think we should have "socialized medicine". So, which developed, low-unemployment country DO you think our health care system should be like?

I already provided a link to Wikipedia's description of Singapore's system. For the 3-4% of GDP cost, it's way cheaper than what we have now, and probably way more fair. My support for a Singapore style system is only if we can do it as cheaply (hint: liberals won't allow that).

zzyzzx says

I already provided a link to Wikipedia's description of Singapore's system. For the 3-4% of GDP cost, it's way cheaper than what we have now, and probably way more fair. My support for a Singapore style system is only if we can do it as cheaply (hint: liberals won't allow that).

Heh, you've got it exactly wrong; its the conservatives who would be screaming that this is Socialism, Marxism, Lenninism, blah blah blah. 80% covered by a government-run system, and almost half of the hospitals run directly by the central government, are you kidding me?

But I must say, you prefaced the link to Singapore with "If you are going to have Socialized Medicine". So is this really what you are advocating for the US? Or do would you prefer some "non socialized medicine" alternative (and if so what country is using your alternative now)?

Most of you don't mention a very simple thing. It is a supply-demand issue. When there is a lack of supply of doctors, nurses and hospitals, a legislation does nothing, nada.

This is not just true for the US. It is true for the most developed western countries. In addition, we have a higher salaries for doctors, and higher prices for medicines.

For example, the healthcare cost in Germany is prohibitively expensive for a tourist, unless you have a really great travel insurance. Taxes are high to cover that cost for residents. Then, usually you would wait 4 months for an appointment with a specialist.

Also, it is wrong to assume that every developed western nation has 100% socialized healthcare. Everyone has some degree of socialized healthcare, US included. The Swiss healthcare is probably more free market healthcare than ours.

gsr says

Most of you don't mention a very simple thing. It is a supply-demand issue. When there is a lack of supply of doctors, nurses and hospitals, a legislation does nothing, nada.

This is not just true for the US. It is true for the most developed western countries. In addition, we have a higher salaries for doctors, and higher prices for medicines.

Simply not true. There is no shortage of doctors in Europe at all. The only developed western country that has a shortage of any kind is NZ. NZ has low doctor pay combined with a very onerous medical training regime that results in many NZ trained doctors moving to Australia.

There isn't a shortage of doctors in the US either. There is a very poor distribution of doctors both geographically and by specialty. The supply demand issue is that no one wants to work in places like Huntington WV, Moses Lake, WA or Winnamucca, NV. Look at the medical recruitment ads. There are jobs for doctors all over the country that go unfilled year after year.

>Simply not true. There is no shortage of doctors in Europe at all. The only developed western country that has a shortage of any kind is NZ. NZ has low doctor pay combined with a very onerous medical training regime that results in many NZ trained doctors moving to Australia.

Here is the nationmaster list on this:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_phy_per_1000_peo-physicians-per-1-000-people

USA has lower number of doctors per capita than Mongolia.

I can tell you there is a shortage of doctors right in the Bay Area, the so called fortress. I am not talking about West Virginia. Go and see a specialist, he/she will spend just 2 minutes talking, and then you receive a bill 500.

Studying medical is excruciatingly long, hard and expensive here as well. You don't need to do that much study just to become a family practitioner.

AverageBear says

I'm still blown away that the media isn't even calling out that Obama lied to us all these years.

So Fox News, Limbaugh, Drudge. ect are not valid as parts of the news media.... I guess we do agree on something.

gsr says

Also, it is wrong to assume that every developed western nation has 100% socialized healthcare. Everyone has some degree of socialized healthcare, US included. The Swiss healthcare is probably more free market healthcare than ours.

In what way? According to Wikipedia, Swiss are required to purchase basic health insurance which covers a range of treatments mandated by federal law, which is required to be the same throughout the country . Insurers are required to offer this basic insurance to everyone, regardless of age or medical condition, and are not allowed to make a profit off this basic insurance, but can on supplemental plans.
The insured pays the insurance premium for the basic plan up to 8% of their personal income. If a premium is higher than this, then the government gives the insured a cash subsidy to pay for any additional premium.

How is this more free market? If someone were to propose this here the shrieks of "SOCIALISM!!!" from the right would be deafening!

bdrasin says

In what way? According to Wikipedia, Swiss are required to purchase basic health insurance which covers a range of treatments mandated by federal law, which is required to be the same throughout the country . Insurers are required to offer this basic insurance to everyone, regardless of age or medical condition, and are not allowed to make a profit off this basic insurance, but can on supplemental plans.

The "basic" insurance all that should be needed.
This basic plan is what would have for an auto insurance, for example.
We don't call insurers to fix our car when it naturally breaks down, do
we? Neither do we call life insurance. Why health insurance needs to
be any different?

What are trying to accomplish here is Cadillac plan for everyone. The government subsidizes health costs, insurance costs of all types, including cosmetic surgery for example. So it is definitely more "socialistic", or should I say, stupid that way.

Every big company would rather give a Cadillac health plan for employees instead of giving raises to people. That way, the company
saves money on taxes.

We are going toward a situation where our health insurance
cost will eat up the most of our salary, neither Obama nor Romney has any clue on how to fix it.

evilmonkeyboy says

Limbaugh, Drudge.

ONly to Liberals.

And Yes, I'm begining to believe that FOX news is the only vestige of television journalism in America. Talking heads aside, please understand, I'm not talking about the pundit shows, and "expert Panel shows" I mean the news shows and segments that are actual reports from around the country and world. They are the only news network that reports more than the "Division Lubricant" that all networks report 24/7. Sure so does FOX, but only during their Panel shows.
They report it all good or bad, republican screw ups and Liberal debacles, but more importantly.

They are the only network reporting more than all of the political fuss that keeps America divided.

I quit watching FOX when the Operation IRAQ started, and they had the "WAR ROOM" and all of their panels poped up. Yes they invented that format. But every single network so hell bent on trying to out FOX, FOX has abandoned any and all journalism in liue of sit and spin 24/7 television.

At least FOX still takes a few hours out of the day to report the news.

Now tell me I'm fucking wrong, and I'll call you a thick headed liar, with your head up the split of your agenda.

I should thank Vincent and most all patnet Liberals for turning me on to them. You know damn well your self they are the only News still on the television or you guys wouldn't watch them so much.

gsr says

Here is the nationmaster list on this:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_phy_per_1000_peo-physicians-per-1-000-people

USA has lower number of doctors per capita than Mongolia.

So what does that have to do with the price of tea in china? The US is at the low end of the 2-3.5 range that almost the entire developed world sits in. Being at the low end of normal does not constitute a shortage. Africa where most of the nations sit at below .5 many below .2 is a shortage.

The bay area does not constitute the entire US no matter how much the denizens of the fortress might believe it so. Go Boston, NY, Atlanta, south Florida, most of Texas, or a great many other area's you will find specialists tripping over each other.

CaptainShuddup says

ONly to Liberals.

Strange. CS knows what the mandate is. I'm not saying he's interested in really understanding. But he has the general picture.

Mandate: Everyone who can afford it, will be mandated to have health insurance of some kind.

If they don't they pay a penalty.

Roberts says that the only way that this can be constitutional if it is construed as a tax. That is if you frame it as a tax. This his opinion - note 4 justices thought the commerce clause was a sufficient reason.

CS thinks this is intellectual gobbledygook.

"Either it's a tax or it isn't. We now know it's a tax and that Obama lied. Fox and Rush say this and damn it, it's true. And you smartypants average intelligence or higher people just need to admit it."

"Fox news is the only real news !!"

I guess if you just feel something strongly enough, that makes it true.

You have to feel kinda sorry for the poor slob.

CaptainShuddup says

And Yes, I'm begining to believe that FOX news is the only vestige of television journalism in America.

Foxnews is to conservatives what MSNBC is to liberals nothing more nothing less. Most media is very biased, I just hate when conservatives complain about the media being liberal and having a liberal agenda.

Maybe more people should start complaining about the fact that HALF of the media is liberal and HALF of the media is conservative. I personally watch, CNN, Foxnews, and MSNBC because I like to hear the different views.

If I want a Liberal faceshot I listen to NPR.