Then what's the answer pray tell, because it's not government. You're either going to have one of them control the medical market, or the other, or both. It won't be neither, so it's counterproductive to argue about this.

i've already given him the answer, now he just needs to understand it.

i'm not arguing, i'm telling.

and i am not your puppet so, why don't you choke on a chicken bone and die.

The best way to fix health care is to set a limit of how much profit you can make in the business and then highly regulate what profit is considered to be so hiding it requires more effort than it is worth.

Setting profit/price ceilings isn't the answer because that's going to invite more corruption while doing half assed work. Furthermore, a ceiling would be ridiculously subjective in terms of what is considered a "profit", and you're inviting a whole new bag of worms.

Not sure where the puppet comes in, and I was to choke on a chicken bone, I would obviously be dead, so need for the redundant terminology.:1orglaugh

Costs have come down on porn memberships. No, because I would have a direct cost and not pure profit before cost. You replenish a service, which isn't a product.


Between $3k and $100k a month cheaper.

I've saved $10,000's moving to Vonage. My cell service years ago was $100's a month, my wifes is $100 a month.

Extremely... you can get them free now.





Do they have less people than in the past covered? Yes...



Nope... First our gov needs to reduce in size, greatly. Then increase in proper areas rather than bullshit ones. Regulate the industry, profits and cost of goods. Regulate the legal side of the problem. Regulate the costs of insurance on doctors/hospitals. Then either the gov does it directly or regulates a public option, that people can opt-in to that is funded by those people, insurance companies, public money/donations, bonds, Companies could get lower capital gains taxes by using using/funding the public option. And I'm sure lots of other ways I can't think of.

I also support extremes like mandatory drug tests, fitness requirements, etc or you're taxed more.



Either way, it's more Gov control, more gov regulation, more gov dipping into the free market. No insurance, will require huge oversight on overall industry rather than controlling just them which can regulate for gov - rather than gov having to explode in size for the overall industry regulation.

you are mincing words.
costs have come down on porn memberships because people are broke and most of it is free now anyway, not because millions are rushing to join and give you their money.



your Internet service is lower today by $3k - $100k versus the early 90s?
did i miss something?


okay, so you found a cheaper alternative using Vonage, that does not negate the fact that phone service (landlines & cellular) is not cheaper today than in the past.


how many people do you know that are using a free phone versus how many are plunking down hundreds for smart phones? just because you can get one for free doesn't mean the majority of people are exercising that option.

not to mention that nearly all "free" phones come with contracts. that's not "free".






why is that?
maybe because it's too expensive?




why do you assume the government is a better option than the insurance companies?
the government is the one that's now going to force people to buy insurance.
what has the government taken over that hasn't turned into a miserable failure?


you may be truly lost Doc.




you need to see beyond the choices you are handed.

We already have welfare systems in place for people who are willing to give up control to the government and throw themselves on the mercy of others.

The price I quoted for medical tourism to Thailand included airfare and accommodations. It was not a hypothetical.

By your own baby math, 33 years of insurance is closer to 300k than 100k. Again, I was not speaking hypothetically on the cancer with multiple surgeries. The insurance company charged more in premiums than it paid out. And that is not even counting the fact that there would probably be a cash patient discount without insurance.

How much do you think a flu shot or doctor visit costs?

In Canada, they didn't outlaw insurance, they just made it mostly superfluous for healthcare. You wouldn't support something like that which would take care of everyone, even if it did limit immigration, as Canada does?

The USA is supposed to be based on tenets of personal freedom and the right to the pursuit of happiness.

If the government mandates that I have to give funds I can't afford to insurance companies, so that I then can't afford to get the medical care I may need, or can't afford things my business needs, or whatever I might have spent my hard-earned revenue on, that is wrong.

If the government gets to make me take time out of my work week to come piss in a cup for them or see how many jumping jacks I can do, that is wrong. The economy is bad enough without there being one more thing on everyone's to-do list. Not to mention the humiliation factor. A populace which would submit to drug and fitness testing of this sort will submit to anything.

I will gladly do without a free one, in order to keep as much of my autonomy as is possible.

Quoted for truth.

You act as if you've never used a Gov service before.

It's still about getting to Thailand, my grandmother was so sick once they found out she could hardly ride in a car let alone fly half way around the world.



I did 3000 a year.

I've never seen that or heard that in a cancer patient before.



Very little, that's how many can't afford it.


They offer insurance in Canada.. it's just not out of control. I worked in Canada for 2 years, had full access to the health system and every other benefit including the $900 tax refund for gas tax they had left over.

If you're on the Gov dime you should be required to prove that you need it. If you can afford drugs, you don't need Gov assistance. If you're fat lazy shit head that eats out every meal, you make more than enough money, you don't need Gov help on Insurance or anything.

Those are very reasonable.

Well, Medicare, ss, taxes now don't kill you and Canadians seem to get along perfectly fine, personally and business wise. I'm pretty sure we can adapt. Anyone that works can afford it, anyone that truly can't - truly can't afford to get sick, at all either.

They submit in the Military, Gov workers, millions of jobs all over the Country. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be that big of a deal.

You support people on welfare/gov dime, also doing drugs?

Man, the mind of you right wingers is twisted up.

Uhm, I like having roads and police and fireman and such just fine. My point was that we have a welfare system in place, so acting like this new bill will help the "poor" is simply false. The poor who are willing to go on assistance were already covered. This bill does add additional expenses to the budgets of an already heavily squeezed middle class.

How do you multiply $3k x 2.2 years and get $20k for a birth? You are obviously smart enough to see that doesn't make sense. I really think the problem with the whole insurance sales pitch is that it inhibits people's basic math skills. They push so many emotional buttons that people stop thinking straight.

You've never come across a cancer patient before whose treatment came to less than a million dollars?


Okay, I haven't gotten a flu shot and you didn't know the answer, so I looked it up. Looks like a lot of grocery stores and pharmacies offer them for free to the needy and they cost $25 to $30 for those who can pay. Are you seriously suggesting that I should pay thousands of dollars a year for health insurance, so I can get a $30 flu shot I don't especially want?

You were talking about not outlawing an industry, just because insurance is a predatory, economically-destructive industry. I pointed out that, in Canada, they didn't outlaw insurance, they just made it mostly superfluous for healthcare. You wouldn't support something like that which would take care of everyone, even if it did limit immigration, as Canada does? How was what you said, in any way, a response to that point? Do you dislike the Canadian system in general or just not want it in the US?

So is your point that you think people on welfare should face additional humiliation or that you think everyone should get insurance through a system where everyone gets treated that way or that you think the government should get to decide what each and every American is permitted to spend or save money on?

I don't know where you live, but I live in California where minimum wage is $8/hr and of course that doesn't apply to people in business. Someone who can't afford a $30 flu shot, definitely can't afford thousands of dollars a year for insurance, especially when that insurance could disallow everything they need, if they ever are late with a payment. Can you seriously not get it through your head that insurance, by adding a heartless middleman, makes healthcare more expensive and less accessible and insurance is almost always more expensive than healthcare?

I may have missed it, has our country collapsed yet?

And with it are lots of other changes coming too, tax code adjustments, tax havens, budget changes, wars ending. It's not one thing happening, several things are changing and healthcare is just one of them. Saying this bill wouldn't help the poor is simply crazy talk, of course it will help... like saying the VA or Medicare doesn't get used. Of course people need it.

That was in reference to cancer, not childbirth.


Never heard of your insurance bills being more than the treatment would cost.


No.. I'm saying some people can't afford $30 and you helping pay will make it so they can. :)


AMP was talking about outlawing it. I want to regulate it. I loved the Canadian system and think we should be working to get ours working somewhat like they have.

Not sure what you mean by limit immigration, it's not hard to move to Canada, become a citizen or even work in Canada & have health insurance too. They offer an extremely fast path compared to America.



I've pissed in like 500 cups and taken 100's of physicals, never once was I embarrassed. If the person is, they should seek mental treatments. I think if my tax dollars are going to pay for it, I don't want to be paying for people that "choose" to take the worst personal routes on my dime.

I think they should do it with food stamps and all welfare as well.

Sure I get it... but your dream isn't going to happen. Nobody is going to take out a multi-billion/trillion dollar Industry, it will never happen. What they would do is regulate it though.

I also think if you removed insurance all together it would require the gov to step in and create a massive regulatory body that would greatly expand the size of gov and its costs. The insurance companies regulate lots of shit right now, someone would still need to make sure it's done and done fairly. They do fill a gap with more than just insurance.

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/obama-jesus.jpg

feel the light , become one, ... with the light

A man of the constitution & filled with pure love.. such respect!

Okay, what in this bill helps anyone who is poor or middle class i.e. not the tax haven stuff for the wealthy, just what you think is new and helpful?

Your math was that a $20k bill for childbirth equaled about 2.2 years of premiums. If so, then how can 33 years of premiums be less than $100k?

How do you think insurance companies make money? You understand they are, in our current system, for-profit?

Do you understand that my whole objection to being forced to buy insurance is that I have done the math and understand that insurance will almost certainly cost me more over a lifetime than healthcare will?

Many grocery stores and drugstores already give flu shots out for free to the needy. Maybe some people in rural areas have trouble getting them, but we need more doctors in rural areas anyway. That is an entirely additional issue, which should have been addressed in this bill. Is there something about flu shots in this healthcare bill?

My point was that Canada didn't have to outlaw it or regulate it to get rid of the abuses; they just gave people a decent and obvious alternative.

Canada does not permit elderly Americans to buy property there because they fear abuses of their healthcare system.

So, if someone loses their job because they are a drug addict and it eventually impacts their performance, you think, as a society, we should let them starve in the street? If someone eats cheap fattening food, instead of more healthy expensive food, then, when they hit a certain weight, you think, as a society, we should let them starve in the street? I don't think that is where your heart is at, so you must just not have thought this through.

I'm not embarrassed to piss in a cup for a lab test my doctor and I agree I need. I'm not embarrassed to get a physical. I think there is an element of subjugation and domination, however, in a government requiring access to such personal information.

We don't need to outlaw health insurance. Trying to regulate something that complex is going to be pretty impossible, with so much money from that industry going into politicians' coffers, and laymen having such a minimal understanding of the structure.

Just offer a decent alternative, as they do in Canada, and let the market take its course.

It's health insurance... so the entire thing.

I'm not really sure how this is relevant.. but the 2.2 years is 8k with state services, if we did it on 20k for full price it's like 6 years.



Just like I am.. however what they do is broker the cost between services. It's not a cost in cost out business.

That's the thing, I don't care if you can get it cheaper. Or if you're one of those few lucky ones that never have a problem or never get hurt... The point is to make sure others who aren't so lucky can be covered and for people like you that refuse it, don't have it, something really bad happens and it ends up costing the tax payer either way.


Yes, the flu shots and all vaccines would be part of it. No reason to focus in one one thing, lots of little things people need all the time that they can't afford.



They regulated the living piss out of insurance, you can get insurance on top of the Gov care, all of which is regulated heavily as well.


When you provide the better service, like Canada has. You have to create laws to stop people from coming in to get those services. Much like we do with our southern border.


If they failed to get help, yes - cut them off. I have zero heart from them if they want to get on the system for free.

No, I think he could pay his own way, without question. Healthy food is not more expensive, not by a long shot - organic food might be, but eating healthy costs far less - you even eat less. If you choose to live a life style like this, you shouldn't get free care. If you're able to afford fat ass foods, eating out, you don't need welfare - you wouldn't be starving.


When you're on welfare, they have access to your bank accounts if you have one, they know where you work, how much you earn, the taxes you pay, all your bills, dl, ss card, etc.. anytime you get insurance you get a physical already. A cup of piss, really isn't giving up much more info.

What they don't have access to is knowing if you're making cashing, injecting it up your own, and being a crack whore on the side while taking gov aid.


That's an entirely different subject all together, one that doesn't help our Country at all.

Canada's system isn't much different than what we're getting. It's smaller and cheaper basically.

Doc, I think you mean well, but you seem to see the issue as more black and white than I'm comfortable with. This bill has as much to do with healthcare as the Patriot Act has to do with patriotism.

Do I think that we could have better access to affordable healthcare in America? Yes, I do.

Do I think there is anything in this bill which will help poor or middle class Americans get better access or prices? No, I don't. And you can't think of a single example of how it helps either.

In my experience, especially as I get older, I find my own weight and health much easier to support when I am more flush. Potatoes and pasta cost less than salmon and grapefruit. Times in my life that I had the choice between going hungry and going on welfare, I chose to go hungry. According to NIH, more poor people are morbidly obese than rich people. But that is a minor issue.

You and I disagree on a basic assumption. I am stone cold certain, based on my own experiences and the experiences of those close to me, that, even catastrophic health problems can be cared for for less money than insurance costs. I do not believe I can afford insurance and I don't want to be forced to buy it, regardless of my analysis of my own budget, or their likelihood to be there when I need them.

America is not a nation of totally rich people who are too heartless to help all those totally deserving poor people and must be forced. You can judge the health of an economy by the size and strength of its middle class. The middle class in America is being squeezed out. Adding another burden to the back of the middle class, in the midst of this disaster of an economy, is misguided at best and deliberately sadistic at worst.

The new healthcare bill will re-define a lot of people who identify as middle class, such that they will be forced to accept government assistance and/or greatly decrease their already limited quality of life to pay for insurance.

That is ugly and tragic and will simply pave the way for more lunatic fringe demagogues and a more polarized nation. As we start getting more truly frightening people elected to public office, the people truly responsible will be the politicians who ignored the needs of the middle class, painting the world as all rich versus poor.

wow the US health care system may not be such an embarrassment now? If you guys want to talk about Kenya, well yes the US health care system has more in common with Kenya than it does an advanced developed nation like Australia, the UK, Sweden or Canada.

Hard nosed dog eat dog capitalists may feel zero empathy for the poor dying in the street or performing surgery on themselves, but societies in which citizens have empathy for each other don't mind paying 3% more tax to ensure everyone has the human right of sufficient health care.

and another thing... corporate power is so over the top in the USA, many other countries can do a much higher level of health care for the average Joe at a lower cost because corporations don't own most of the hospitals and don't price gouge on medications. The USA, in it's worship of the capitalist god has given so much power to the corporation and it's government lobbyists that you have to pay twice as much to get anything done.

Corporatism != capitalism. That's what the world needs to learn, giving drug companies, insurance companies and hospitals the ability to set their own inflated prices to supply shareholders with a high return has caused half of this health care mess.

No wonder most people think Christians are latent homos.... Good LORD! Really awful:Oh crap

Since you like personal examples, let me give you one. Last year a friend's wife died giving birth in an up market Thai hospital, they offered him 20000 bht ($700) and told him to go away.

You can't look at health care prices without taking into account the cost of medical malpractice.

And the cost of potential lawsuits for medical malpractice is the main reason why prices are so inflated. However, people and mostly liberals need someone to blame so they create an emotional argument about big bad insurance companies and yet believe more government is the answer, failing to realize that the same type of people control both.

I think it's been clearly stated in this thread more regulation, from costs, legal, etc would help drive the cost down.

However, people and most right wingers fail to understand this is an increase in Gov size either way.

The OBGYN charges what they do because of malpractice insurance. The hospital charging you $30 for an icepack, has nothing to do with malpractice insurance. The costs are also in the goods being passed down to the consumer so the hospital, insurance, doctor, and everyone else can take a part of the pie.

The healthcare bill provides healthcare... that's all it's job is and it does exactly that. I honestly don't know what else it should do other than provide healthcare.

Yeah I can, people that can't afford healthcare or insurance, can use this. That's a great help. Price wise, without question. Like asking if Medicare is more expensive than normal insurance, hehe... it's not even close.

Why would you do that? You pay into a system every time you take a check just in case something like that happens, to YOU. It's your money - use it! Unhealthy food is eating out, packaged foods, instant foods... which cost a great deal more than if you made it yourself & you would get more food.

Again though, if you choose to take that path, then sweet. If you had kids though....

I'm sure more poor people are fat, cheap packaged foods, lower education, lots of reasons for this. This is why proper education and working with people, to help drive the costs of care down, is very logical.

If you can afford health care costs out of pocket you can afford insurance. If you got insurance at 18 years old and never used until you were 50 is roughly 96k or 100k paid in.

At 100k, a heart problem, cancer, a week in the hospital, lots of stuff would eat that up really fast. As well, insurance 'can' also pay your bills, house, car, insurance bill, every single bill - for you. So you can focus on getting better & and not losing your house.


I think this will help the middle class, not hurt it... Stable costs, the idea that you could budget around medical costs unlike now, no shock costs with kids, so many benefits for the middle class/poor that it's crazy.

Everyone is going to be paying into the Gov system either way... Just like SS/Medicare, unemployment, etc - if you don't want to use it, thats your choice, but you'll still have it so you won't have to go buy anything extra.