• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Health care costs set to increase sharply next year... thanks, Obamacare!

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
10,904
Reaction score
4,688
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Listen.. just think for a minute. You are giving tests to HEALTH PEOPLE. THINK. How effective is that?

What is preventative is getting people into treatment that are having an issue.. and preventing further complications. That's preventative medicine.
I still doubt that getting treatment to someone already having symptoms of a disease is preventative. Preventative would be prior to the symptoms starting. A Flu shot prevents the flu. A vaccine prevents the measels, flue, whatever. From the OBamacare website:

This is Preventive Care: Preventive care focuses on evaluating your current health status when you are symptom free. Preventive care allows you to obtain early diagnosis and treatment, to help avoid more serious health problems. Through a preventive exam and routine health screenings, your doctor can determine your current health status and detect early warning signs of more serious problems. Your preventive care services may include immunizations, physical exams, lab work and x-rays. During your preventive visit your doctor will determine what tests or health screenings are right for you based on many factors such as your age, gender, overall health status, personal health history and your current health condition.
And what you are describing, where the patient already has the symptoms and you are diagnosing:

This isn’t Preventive Care: Medical treatment for specific health conditions, on-going care, lab or other tests necessary to manage or treat a medical issue or health condition are considered diagnostic care or treatment, not preventive care.
And it IS what Obamacare did. By increasing the number of people that have insurance.. this means that people who have illness or other beginning health issues can get treatment early rather then end up in the ER with say kidney failure from uncontrolled diabetes..
I am not able to find any links indicating that giving test to someone already having the disease or symptoms of the disease is preventative care.

And it IS what Obamacare did.
Obamacare is giving free preventative care to all (healty and sick) in all insurance plans - I know I get my complete workup every year, all free. Which is not exactly what you are describing for only already sick people.
 

sangha

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
67,218
Reaction score
28,522
Location
Lower Hudson Valley, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
well, i'm sure that the wealthy are able to purchase preferential treatment in the states. the rest of us pay ridiculous amounts of money into the health care system when we get sick unless we work a specific job that provides great health insurance.
Helix

Please re-read Jaeger's response to this post of yours (in #169) where he denies that the wealthy can buy preferential treatment. Then read this post where he describes two patients, one of whom received better treatment due to their having better coverage

Yep.. Well.. combine the population growth.. and that California probable expanded more people on Medicaid.. (where as some of the states I do business did not expand Medicaid).. its not surprising.

What irks me though is the BS. Okay.. so we hear all this talk about "preventative medicine" and getting people care before they cost more money. OK.. that makes sense. THEN they have people on the expansion of Medicaid.. and nickel and dime the cheap preventative stuff.

we had a lady that blew her knee OUT. Complete disruption of her ACL, almost complete tear of her MCL and a huge tear of her medial meniscus She was on the expansion of Medicaid. She spent two weeks in a brace basically unable to use it.. until she could get approval of surgery. THEN after surgery we wanted therapy right away. DENIED. Home program afterward only. so what do we see at follow up? She is unable to bear weight and is developing a contracture. We get approval for therapy... 3 visits.. that's it. Therapy gets her started and moving but wants more therapy... they fight for more and get another 3 visits. After that.. no more visits. So when we see her.. the gains she made in therapy were gone.. and she was worse.
So we end up manipulating her. We want therapy again. Nope.. denied. After she started tightening up yet again.. we got three visits again of therapy. Luckily the therapist was smart enough to recognize that there was no way therapy was going to work with the insurance nickel and diming it..so he recommended an expensive dynamic splint for her knee to pull her into extension as something better than nothing. Luckily.. that seemed to work to a degree so she ended up with a very slight contracture but functional.

of course the cost of the brace alone was more than 3 months of therapy would have been.. not to mention the manipulation, and the extra pain medication, and doctors visits.

This is Medicaid.. a government program.. so its amazing to me to see these fellows think that if we went to single payer government healthcare that its going to be just great.
 

jaeger19

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
26,759
Reaction score
6,952
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Helix

Please re-read Jaeger's response to this post of yours (in #169) where he denies that the wealthy can buy preferential treatment. Then read this post where he describes two patients, one of whom received better treatment due to their having better coverage
Yes Sangha.. please read it.. and try to actually understand it.

It proves my points about healthcare in this country and why single payer is a bad idea.
 

sangha

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
67,218
Reaction score
28,522
Location
Lower Hudson Valley, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Yes Sangha.. please read it.. and try to actually understand it.

It proves my points about healthcare in this country and why single payer is a bad idea.
I said nothing about your single payer points. I pointed out how Helix pointed out that the wealthy can buy better care than the poor in the US, that he is correct and that even you know he was right about that

But instead of acknowledging that he was right, you raised a straw man about how the wealthy can't buy better care in the hospital (which is also untrue) and that was a dishonest thing to do.

Will you ever admit that Helix was right about how the wealthy can buy better care than the poor in the US?
 

jaeger19

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
26,759
Reaction score
6,952
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Buck.. please read the whole paragraph you posted and not just the highlighted portion.

This is Preventive Care: Preventive care focuses on evaluating your current health status when you are symptom free. Preventive care allows you to obtain early diagnosis and treatment, to help avoid more serious health problems. Through a preventive exam and routine health screenings, your doctor can determine your current health status and detect early warning signs of more serious problems. Your preventive care services may include immunizations, physical exams, lab work and x-rays. During your preventive visit your doctor will determine what tests or health screenings are right for you based on many factors such as your age, gender, overall health status, personal health history and your current health condition
.

Please try to understand that. If a person comes in and has thirst, has fatigue,.frequent urination or has HAD symptoms of such.. then they would be appropriate for a blood test. It does not mean that the person may be experiencing symptoms AT THAT VERY MOMENT. But their history of whats going on with them would tell the clinician that something is not right and therefore a test will be ordered based on what the physician sees.

That means that the tests will be ordered if the patient has or has had symptoms indicative of a problem.. AGAIN... LIKE I SAID.

You aren't giving everyone a chest CT to check for cancer. Only those folks that have the history and symptoms or history of symptoms and other warning signs that indicate a need for testing are tested .

I am not able to find any links indicating that giving test to someone already having the disease or symptoms of the disease is preventative care.
Come now.. I found a link it 2 seconds:

Preventive medicine: Medical practices that are designed to avert and avoid disease. For example, screening for hypertension and treating it before it causes disease is good preventive medicine. Preventive medicine takes a proactive approach to patient care
Preventive medicine definition - MedicineNet - Health and Medical Information Produced by Doctors

Another:

A different way to define Preventive Medicine is to divide the entire field into two broad groups: clinical and non-clinical Preventive Medicine. Doctors who work in clinical Preventive Medicine see patients on a daily basis and may provide services in screening, health counseling, and immunization. This can include diabetics, smokers, cardiac patients, and others who can benefit from prevention and lifestyle modification
.

Preventive Medicine: A Student Resource Page
 

jaeger19

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
26,759
Reaction score
6,952
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I said nothing about your single payer points. I pointed out how Helix pointed out that the wealthy can buy better care than the poor in the US, that he is correct and that even you know he was right about that

But instead of acknowledging that he was right, you raised a straw man about how the wealthy can't buy better care in the hospital (which is also untrue) and that was a dishonest thing to do.

Will you ever admit that Helix was right about how the wealthy can buy better care than the poor in the US?
Actually.. that's not right.. sorry but the standard of care that I pointed out for an ACL is for basically any private insurance.,.and for medicare. which includes all the poor people and middle class that have private insurance or medicare. THEY ARE NOT WEALTHY. and the the CEO that has bluecross blue shield cannot buy better care than the ditchdigger who works for him that has BlueCross Blue Shield.

Not to mention.. that ACL surgery in the first place.. and the hospital stay.. all that care is exactly EQUAL no matter your wealth. THATS the facts.

No sangha.. whats dishonest is to claim that the wealthy in America can "buy better care" like what happens in Europe where there are WHOLE HOSPITALS.. and hospital wings.. that are JUST FOR THOSE THAT CAN PAY. Where their really is too separate systems.. a pubic system of doctors and hospitals.. and a private one for those that can pay.

THATS whats dishonest.
 

sangha

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
67,218
Reaction score
28,522
Location
Lower Hudson Valley, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Actually.. that's not right.. sorry but the standard of care that I pointed out for an ACL is for basically any private insurance.,.and for medicare. which includes all the poor people and middle class that have private insurance or medicare. THEY ARE NOT WEALTHY. and the the CEO that has bluecross blue shield cannot buy better care than the ditchdigger who works for him that has BlueCross Blue Shield.
Only a fool would think that they could trick someone into thinking they didn't use a straw man by using another straw man

We weren't talking about the middle class vs the wealthy, or the wealthy vs people on medicare or private insurance. Here, let me remind you of what you said
Actually the wealthy are really prevented from purchasing preferential treatment in the states to a large degree. In the hospital.. the person in room one is a multimillionaire and the person in the bed next to him is on Medicaid and as poor as a church mouse. and they get the same care.
Your own words show that even you know that the wealthy can purchase better health care than the poor
Yep.. Well.. combine the population growth.. and that California probable expanded more people on Medicaid.. (where as some of the states I do business did not expand Medicaid).. its not surprising.

What irks me though is the BS. Okay.. so we hear all this talk about "preventative medicine" and getting people care before they cost more money. OK.. that makes sense. THEN they have people on the expansion of Medicaid.. and nickel and dime the cheap preventative stuff.

we had a lady that blew her knee OUT. Complete disruption of her ACL, almost complete tear of her MCL and a huge tear of her medial meniscus She was on the expansion of Medicaid. She spent two weeks in a brace basically unable to use it.. until she could get approval of surgery. THEN after surgery we wanted therapy right away. DENIED. Home program afterward only. so what do we see at follow up? She is unable to bear weight and is developing a contracture. We get approval for therapy... 3 visits.. that's it. Therapy gets her started and moving but wants more therapy... they fight for more and get another 3 visits. After that.. no more visits. So when we see her.. the gains she made in therapy were gone.. and she was worse.
So we end up manipulating her. We want therapy again. Nope.. denied. After she started tightening up yet again.. we got three visits again of therapy. Luckily the therapist was smart enough to recognize that there was no way therapy was going to work with the insurance nickel and diming it..so he recommended an expensive dynamic splint for her knee to pull her into extension as something better than nothing. Luckily.. that seemed to work to a degree so she ended up with a very slight contracture but functional.

of course the cost of the brace alone was more than 3 months of therapy would have been.. not to mention the manipulation, and the extra pain medication, and doctors visits.

This is Medicaid.. a government program.. so its amazing to me to see these fellows think that if we went to single payer government healthcare that its going to be just great.
In one post you claim that people on Medicaid get the same treatment as the wealthy, and in another thread you make it clear that your own experience proves you know better.
 

jaeger19

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
26,759
Reaction score
6,952
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Only a fool would think that they could trick someone into thinking they didn't use a straw man by using another straw man

We weren't talking about the middle class vs the wealthy, or the wealthy vs people on medicare or private insurance. Here, let me remind you of what you said


Your own words show that even you know that the wealthy can purchase better health care than the poor


In one post you claim that people on Medicaid get the same treatment as the wealthy, and in another thread you make it clear that your own experience proves you know better.
And that's because what I said was true Sangha. Sorry that you are so upset about being proven wrong by me that you have to create strawman arguments to try and help your ego.. but what I said was true.

The patient in the room was a millionaire. and the other patient in the room was a person on Medicaid. They both got the same care in the hospital,, the wealthy person could not buy themelves better care.

Now in many places in Europe.. they COULD TRULY buy themselves better care, better surgeon.. better technique, better room, heck better whole hospital.

Now.. as far as the outpatient care in my other patient? Yes.. if you have government insurance like Medicaid.. or VA.. there is a chance that your insurance will limit your care as opposed to private insurance or medicare. this is not a function of wealth as much as its a function of their insurance.

The poor person with Medicare.. is going to get the same care as the rich person with Medicare. And the rich CEO with Bluecross blueshield is going to get the same care as his employee with bluecross blueshield.

No doubt that having insurance and what insurance you have matters. That's true.. but its not the function of wealth as much as it is in other countries.. where their aren;t just different insurances but actually different care provision. there are actually private hospitals. private clinics that the wealthy and upper middle class can go to and a public system where everyone else goes.

We don't really have that tiered system here in the states. Heck.. a poor person with Medicaid is going to get better care than a middle class person without insurance.. so wealth isn't the primary factor in the US.

those are the facts. Now here is another fact.. that the worst insurance to have in this country.. and insurance does matter.. is usually Medicaid.. a government healthcare.. the next worse is usually the VA.. another government healthcare. And for people in other countries that have government healthcare.. the insurance that's most like what they have in most of these countries is like the VA and Medicaid

that's the reality.. and yet do you and others clamor for? "government healthcare"....

Now I know that after being proven wrong over and over again... your ego stings.. but you need to get over it.
 

Helix

Administrator
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
64,523
Reaction score
45,931
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Helix

Please re-read Jaeger's response to this post of yours (in #169) where he denies that the wealthy can buy preferential treatment. Then read this post where he describes two patients, one of whom received better treatment due to their having better coverage
the argument that money doesn't buy better care is quite frankly too ridiculous to address.
 

sangha

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
67,218
Reaction score
28,522
Location
Lower Hudson Valley, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
And that's because what I said was true Sangha. Sorry that you are so upset about being proven wrong by me that you have to create strawman arguments to try and help your ego.. but what I said was true.
No, it was untrue and dishonest.

First, you responded to the factual claim that the wealthy can purchase better health care than the poor with the straw man that the rich and the poor get the same care in the hospital (even though that's not true)

Then, when I pointed out how you contradicted yourself (by posting what you said in another thread), you made some argument about people on private insurance or *Medicare* when what your other post spoke about was *MedicAID*
 

jaeger19

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
26,759
Reaction score
6,952
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
No, it was untrue and dishonest.

First, you responded to the factual claim that the wealthy can purchase better health care than the poor with the straw man that the rich and the poor get the same care in the hospital (even though that's not true)

Then, when I pointed out how you contradicted yourself (by posting what you said in another thread), you made some argument about people on private insurance or *Medicare* when what your other post spoke about was *MedicAID*
Nope.. it was true and honest...

I responded to the incorrect claim that the wealthy can purchase better healthcare than the poor with the fact that the rich and poor get the same care in the hospital.. in the same room. same doctors, same nurses, etc. EVEN the Medicaid patient is getting the same care.

where in many other countries with universal government care.. there are separate PRIVATE hospitals or wings of hospitals for the wealthy and public facilities for everyone else.

Again all facts.

Sure.. if you are wealthy in America.. you have a better chance of having better insurance than a poor person. Because as I stated insurance matters. BUT that doesn;t take away from the fact that if the CEO has bluecross.. and the employee has bluecross... they get the same care.
It doesn't take away from the fact that the person on Medicaid.. is going to the same hospital and getting the same hospital care as the wealthy guy with even with Bluecross.

UNLIKE many other countries with universal government insurance where there are two distinct facility and provider divisions.. one for the wealthy and one public one for everyone else.

Make it personal all you want.. but you simply can;t get around the facts.
 

jaeger19

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
26,759
Reaction score
6,952
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
the argument that money doesn't buy better care is quite frankly too ridiculous to address.
Because you have no clue what you are talking about.

Sorry but true. If you were willing to admit the truth to yourself.. you would admit that everything I have said has been correct.
 

Helix

Administrator
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
64,523
Reaction score
45,931
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Because you have no clue what you are talking about.

Sorry but true. If you were willing to admit the truth to yourself.. you would admit that everything I have said has been correct.
that's almost as funny as your claim that money can't buy better care in the states. good luck convincing even your own side of that one.
 

sangha

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
67,218
Reaction score
28,522
Location
Lower Hudson Valley, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Nope.. it was true and honest...

I responded to the incorrect claim that the wealthy can purchase better healthcare than the poor
There's nothing incorrect about it.

with the fact that the rich and poor get the same care in the hospital
Which is a straw man and irrelevant to whether or not the rich can buy better care than the poor.
 

jaeger19

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
26,759
Reaction score
6,952
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
that's almost as funny as your claim that money can't buy better care in the states. good luck convincing even your own side of that one.
Whatever.. if it makes you feel better.. go for it.

I clearly explained what I said. If you choose to be obtuse.. that's your prerogative.
 

jaeger19

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
26,759
Reaction score
6,952
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
There's nothing incorrect about it.



Which is a straw man and irrelevant to whether or not the rich can buy better care than the poor.
Yes it was incorrect.. and I explained why in detail.

Particularly in the context of the conversation comparing our countries healthcare with other countries.

And no its not a strawman...

If the rich and poor get the same care in the hospital... it is certainly relevant to a discussion of whether " the rich can buy better care than the poor"

Particularly if you are comparing a country where the rich and the poor go to the same hospital and get the same care.. and a country where the rich can go to private hospitals while everyone else goes to a public hospital.

I guess your definition of a "strawman" is "if it doesn't fit my narrative.. then its a strawman"

Whenever you or anyone else wants to have a legitimate and intelligent discussion of healthcare I am available... but the BS that you are spouting claiming I am "dishonest" and strawman for pointing out facts.. is too tiring...

good day.
 

Threegoofs

Potential COVID carrier
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
48,079
Reaction score
16,290
Location
The birthplace of Italian Beef
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yes it was incorrect.. and I explained why in detail.

Particularly in the context of the conversation comparing our countries healthcare with other countries.

And no its not a strawman...

If the rich and poor get the same care in the hospital... it is certainly relevant to a discussion of whether " the rich can buy better care than the poor"

Particularly if you are comparing a country where the rich and the poor go to the same hospital and get the same care.. and a country where the rich can go to private hospitals while everyone else goes to a public hospital.

I guess your definition of a "strawman" is "if it doesn't fit my narrative.. then its a strawman"

Whenever you or anyone else wants to have a legitimate and intelligent discussion of healthcare I am available... but the BS that you are spouting claiming I am "dishonest" and strawman for pointing out facts.. is too tiring...

good day.
You're argument is so wrong its almost laughable. Anyone in the US healthcare system knows there is a massive disparity in care between rich and poor. Yes, one gets similar care in some situations - an ICU stay, for example - but not in the vast majority.'

There's a reason the rich live 20 years more than the poor on average... and it isnt just a healthy lifestyle.

The new inequality: Health care - Dec. 18, 2013
 

jaeger19

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
26,759
Reaction score
6,952
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
You're argument is so wrong its almost laughable. Anyone in the US healthcare system knows there is a massive disparity in care between rich and poor. Yes, one gets similar care in some situations - an ICU stay, for example - but not in the vast majority.'

There's a reason the rich live 20 years more than the poor on average... and it isnt just a healthy lifestyle.

The new inequality: Health care - Dec. 18, 2013
Sorry.. but my argument is absolutely correct. One gets the same care in the vast majority of situations. Heck man.. the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

Might want to read your own article:

Wealthier Americans tend to be in better health than their poorer counterparts. That's due to a mix of education, behavior and environment, experts say. They are more likely to take better care of themselves, but they also have the means to buy healthier food, live in safer, cleaner neighborhoods and engage in physical activity.

A recent Commonwealth Fund study showed the stark contrast: Some 27% of low-income people smoke and 34% are obese, while only 12% of higher-income folks smoke and 25% are obese. Even more surprising, some 16% of poorer Americans have lost six or more teeth, while only 5% of wealthier ones have
.
Yep.. move along folks.. nothing to see here.. we are trying to say that the wealthy just buy better healthcare and that's the major factor.. not that any of that obesity, healthier food, safer neighborhoods.. have any effect.

Come now.
 

Threegoofs

Potential COVID carrier
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
48,079
Reaction score
16,290
Location
The birthplace of Italian Beef
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Sorry.. but my argument is absolutely correct. One gets the same care in the vast majority of situations. Heck man.. the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

Might want to read your own article:



Yep.. move along folks.. nothing to see here.. we are trying to say that the wealthy just buy better healthcare and that's the major factor.. not that any of that obesity, healthier food, safer neighborhoods.. have any effect.

Come now.
Did not say the disparity was not partially due to lifestyle factors. Sorry to demolish your straw man.
 

maxparrish

Conservatarian
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
6,534
Reaction score
2,448
Location
SF Bay Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
You're argument is so wrong its almost laughable. Anyone in the US healthcare system knows there is a massive disparity in care between rich and poor. Yes, one gets similar care in some situations - an ICU stay, for example - but not in the vast majority.'

There's a reason the rich live 20 years more than the poor on average... and it isnt just a healthy lifestyle.

The new inequality: Health care - Dec. 18, 2013
That is not possible, and you just hate Obamacare.

We were told that under Obamacare all the plans would have to meet specific actuarial overhead expense to health expenditure ratios, and that every plan level would meet that benchmark. Any plan that failed to meet those requirements would not exempt those 'rich' from a 2 percent penalty on their gross income.

Or are you implying that Obamacare is such a crappy deal, that anyone of serious means will pay the fine just to get better care? Do you realize you are dissing Obamacare?
 

sangha

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
67,218
Reaction score
28,522
Location
Lower Hudson Valley, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
That is not possible, and you just hate Obamacare.

We were told that under Obamacare all the plans would have to meet specific actuarial overhead expense to health expenditure ratios, and that every plan level would meet that benchmark. Any plan that failed to meet those requirements would not exempt those 'rich' from a 2 percent penalty on their gross income.

Or are you implying that Obamacare is such a crappy deal, that anyone of serious means will pay the fine just to get better care? Do you realize you are dissing Obamacare?
In the future, please word your arguments coherently
 

Threegoofs

Potential COVID carrier
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
48,079
Reaction score
16,290
Location
The birthplace of Italian Beef
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That is not possible, and you just hate Obamacare.

We were told that under Obamacare all the plans would have to meet specific actuarial overhead expense to health expenditure ratios, and that every plan level would meet that benchmark. Any plan that failed to meet those requirements would not exempt those 'rich' from a 2 percent penalty on their gross income.

Or are you implying that Obamacare is such a crappy deal, that anyone of serious means will pay the fine just to get better care? Do you realize you are dissing Obamacare?
Get back to me when you form a relevant point.

Edit: just saw Sangha's better wordsmithed response. I concur.
 

Helix

Administrator
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
64,523
Reaction score
45,931
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Whatever.. if it makes you feel better.. go for it.

I clearly explained what I said. If you choose to be obtuse.. that's your prerogative.
and i've already posted the data which supports my argument many times. if you choose to try to twist, contort, and pretend that it somehow supports your position... then that's your prerogative. i'd recommend dancing away from your claim that money doesn't buy better care in the states, though.
 

maxparrish

Conservatarian
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
6,534
Reaction score
2,448
Location
SF Bay Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Get back to me when you form a relevant point.

Edit: just saw Sangha's better wordsmithed response. I concur.
What eludes you? You wrote "Anyone in the US healthcare system knows there is a massive disparity in care between rich and poor. Yes, one gets similar care in some situations - an ICU stay, for example - but not in the vast majority.'"

I asked you how was that possible, given that the health insurance market has been replaced by the Obamacare treatment requirements mandated under law? How is it that someone who has most or all of their premiums and out-of-pocket expenses paid by the government going to get such poor care to cause "a massive disparity"?

Your "point" may be true, but only if Obamacare is ****ty insurance that provides only minimal care, or only sub-standard doctors take it, AND the very rich pay a 2 percent penalty and get great care by paying professionals directly out of pocket.

You can't escape the implications of your claim, whether or not you chose to understand the basis of my sarcasm.
 
Top Bottom