Should The GOP be using Obamacare like this?

[99BlownYellowGT]

I was referring to pharmaceutical sales reps.

 

Yeah i know i was just saying it sounds like their pay is comparable to some physicians

[unfunnyryan]

i understand some of the words in this thread

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

dick butter

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i have posted in this thread.

[Scotty2Hotty]

It's time to clean the slate on both sides of the isle. A politician is a politician, no matter how much you "believe" them. They don't give 2 shits about anyone but themselves and their next election. 99% of them are just bodies in a seat stealing oxygen.

[thorne]

When I found out how little the typical Doctor or Lawyer earns my mind was blown.

 

The sheer effort, time, skill, and investment required do not payoff for the vast majority in these fields in my opinion.

 

Yes liberals, I just said I believe most doctors and lawyers are UNDER paid.

 

 

 

When the doc I visit for routine checks (who technically should have the most breadth of medical knowledge) earns less than most of the pharmaceutical sales rep that push pills Mon-Fri 9-5... there is a fucking problem.

 

I think there are allot of misconceptions about liberals. Since I am a liberal and said the same thing.

[SpaceGhost]

I believe public school teachers are underpaid. And are way worse off than any doctor. Not a shedding any tears for doctors.

[Browning]

undereducated is what the newer teachers are. Work on that then their pay.

[Radio Flyer1647545514]

I believe public school teachers are underpaid. And are way worse off than any doctor. Not a shedding any tears for doctors.

 

Public school teachers don't go to school nearly as long nor do they carry as much debt leaving school.

 

My mom is a public school teacher and I'll agree they are underpaid.

[wagner]

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/2/snuggler.gif

[wagner]

The greater good right now is to get our government up and running. 44 fucking times it blows my mind. 44 times you could not pass a vote. It's like the kid who gets mad and takes his ball and goes home.......

 

Stop holding america hostage because you dislike a policy that has been already voted and passed. Especially when you know damn well you can't get past the senate.

 

Pass the clean CR and get the country moving again. Period There's no room for debate here because the bill that's the Clean CR already had compromises and such in it .

 

Obamacare isn't the end all be all of america as much as the Teaparty wants to make it seem like it is.

 

But what is a end of our government is holding this budget issue HOSTAGE and running our Recovering economy back into the ground. The Markets are already responding.

 

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/2/MALARKEY.gif

[gillbot]

The government could stay down for all I care, America will live on without it.

[xlr8tn]

The government could stay down for all I care, America will live on without it.

 

I agree with one exception.....they closed the camp ground that I put the camper in when I hunt. I wouldn't even know this shit is going on except for that. I can make do but it's much nicer to park the camper off the road instead of on the side of the road.

 

I say don't half ass it if you're going to close down.....shut it all down.

[Brandon]

People can believe what ever magic space daddy they want. Just don't make my countries policies based on your mythologies. I will make bigoted comments about ANYONE who tries to make policies based on there Superstitions.

 

I have no reason to accept people who try to make policies like Prayer in school. Or for Idiots to try and force SCIENCE CLASSES to be taught creationism.

 

Your 100% right I think hardcore right wing religious people are idiots. I also feel you should have to pass a test about things you vote on. If you can't answer enough questions accurately you can't vote. Nothing upsets me more than seeing people who head up Science Committees and think our earth is 6000 years old.

 

Separation of Church and state. DONE

 

Pass a test to vote. The dems would never get elected... LOLZZZZZ -

 

They wouldnt find "free" in the answer bank.

[thorne]

You would be surprised I bet. Think about all the Jerry springer repulicans.

[copperhead]

You would be surprised I bet. Think about all the Jerry springer repulicans.

 

I've never met one of those.

 

For what it's worth, Jerry Springer was the Democrat mayor of Cincinnati at one point.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Springer

 

First paragraph...

[2highpsi]

You would be surprised I bet. Think about all the Jerry springer repulicans.

 

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/03/10/pew-makes-it-official-republicans-are-smarter-than-democrats-54686

 

Although Libertarians would probably test better than both.

 

Everything democratic I agree with are social views. But then democrats constantly yell "separation of church and state" and say that these aren't government issues... Ok I agree. So if that's the case then you should vote based of fiscal policy, not social (as social shouldn't be fed issues anyways). That is where I get lost. I get the allure of Democratic social stances. I'm not sure how anyone with a high school education could agree with their fiscal policy however.

 

 

And boy did this thread go sideways. I need to stay out of it.

[2highpsi]

I think there are allot of misconceptions about liberals. Since I am a liberal and said the same thing.

 

For the record, I was just stirring the pot.

 

I know extremely intelligent and successful people on both sides of the aisle. It's probably pretty clear that I lean conservative, but some of my best friends are die hard liberals. It just makes for more interesting conversation. Lol

[thorne]

I've never met one of those.

 

For what it's worth, Jerry Springer was the Democrat mayor of Cincinnati at one point.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Springer

 

First paragraph...

I was talking about his guests not him.

 

felt like this thread needed this

[copperhead]

I was talking about his guests not him.

 

felt like this thread needed this

 

Who do you think votes for Democrat mayors? Same people that watch his show.

 

Oh, and your video doesn't work.

[thorne]

Who do you think votes for Democrat mayors? Same people that watch his show.

 

Oh, and your video doesn't work.

 

It was intentional that it was broken.

 

 

I was chatting with Little guy over the weekend and he pointed out that there are only 2 real options for healthcare.

 

1. Single Payer System: Similar to car insurance you are pooling your risk by having everyone involved.

 

 

2. Jerk System: If you goto ER and don't have insurance/money you get sent away with the broken arm you walked in with.

 

 

Riddle me this? Why do we pay the most for healthcare but have one of the lowest life expectancy;s in the world?

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/07/16-ways-europeans-are-just-better-at-life_n_3950351.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009

[wagner]

It was intentional that it was broken.

 

 

I was chatting with Little guy over the weekend and he pointed out that there are only 2 real options for healthcare.

 

1. Single Payer System: Similar to car insurance you are pooling your risk by having everyone involved.

 

 

2. Jerk System: If you goto ER and don't have insurance/money you get sent away with the broken arm you walked in with.

 

 

Riddle me this? Why do we pay the most for healthcare but have one of the lowest life expectancy;s in the world?

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/07/16-ways-europeans-are-just-better-at-life_n_3950351.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009

 

Option 3: Not let the .gov get mixed up in private enterprise in a way that adds more debt, layers of crap, and a system that will fall under it's own weight.

 

Here, let me give you the first few steps to solve this problem.

 

1. Not allow insurance companies to deny people due to pre-existing conditions (really the only "law or mandate" we need.

 

2. Make it easier for insurance companies to sell across state lines (more options in the private market, less cost).

 

3. Put the screws to those who fraud the system (bet that saves a billion bucks)

[greg1647545532]

1. Not allow insurance companies to deny people due to pre-existing conditions (really the only "law or mandate" we need.

 

The major, glaring flaw in this is that nobody will get health insurance until they need it. And then they will drop their coverage as soon as they're better.

 

Timmy broke his arm? Call up Blue Cross, sign up. Cancel 6 weeks later.

 

Get face aids? Call up Kaiser, sign up. Cancel 2 years later.

 

Insurance companies need a constant influx of cash from people who aren't sick in order to pay out for those who are. If they have to shell out insurance to sick people but can't get any money from those who aren't, the system will collapse.

 

Hence... your #1 pretty much needs an individual mandate in order to work.

[LJ]

Riddle me this? Why do we pay the most for healthcare but have one of the lowest life expectancy;s in the world?

 

Because American's are fat, lazy, violent, sloths. No amount of healthcare is gonna change that.

[wagner]

The major, glaring flaw in this is that nobody will get health insurance until they need it. And then they will drop their coverage as soon as they're better.

 

Timmy broke his arm? Call up Blue Cross, sign up. Cancel 6 weeks later.

 

Get face aids? Call up Kaiser, sign up. Cancel 2 years later.

 

Insurance companies need a constant influx of cash from people who aren't sick in order to pay out for those who are. If they have to shell out insurance to sick people but can't get any money from those who aren't, the system will collapse.

 

Hence... your #1 pretty much needs an individual mandate in order to work.

 

How is that any different than what people do right now? Is there some type of hard data that shows this will be an issue, or is this just a guess?

 

I don't buy into the idea that we have to force everybody to get insurance or pay a fine. That is not what this country was founded on, if people want that Euro style of life, pack your shit up and go.

 

I for one am tired of seeing my tax money go to dead weight. I have no problem helping those who want to pick themselves up by their boot straps.

[greg1647545532]

How is that any different than what people do right now? Is there some type of hard data that shows this will be an issue, or is this just a guess?

 

How is it different? No offense, but I'm not sure I can explain it to you any better than I just did. Maybe I'll try an analogy.

 

Right now you can get phone insurance for like $10 a month. You can sign up at any time, but if your phone is already broken they're obviously not going to cover that phone. They only cover unbroken phones.

 

But congress passes a law that says they can't reject people who try to sign up with broken phones.

 

So do you sign up for the insurance when you first get your phone? Or do you wait for it to be broken and then go sign up? You can spend $120 year and maybe never use the insurance, or you can spend $10 once, cancel right away, and get a new $200 phone.

 

Nobody's done any studies on whether that would actually happen because the idea is broken on its face. Insurance companies would never go for it. Right now they deny people with pre-existing conditions because they have to in order to remain competitive in the marketplace. They do it because those people are very expensive to insure, so if they're forced to accept them the insurance companies will need more money. You can get them more money by raising rates (i.e., your insurance goes up), with subsidies (i.e, your taxes go up) or by increasing their customer base (the individual mandate).

 

I don't buy into the idea that we have to force everybody to get insurance or pay a fine. That is not what this country was founded on, if people want that Euro style of life, pack your shit up and go.

 

But the ACA is decidedly NOT the Euro style of life. That would be universal coverage. I already see the ACA as being a messy compromise -- it's a pretty centrist idea, really. Fix health care but continue to leverage the benefits of the free market by allowing private companies to compete. It's not unlike the school voucher concept that conservatives are so fond of.

 

I for one am tired of seeing my tax money go to dead weight. I have no problem helping those who want to pick themselves up by their boot straps.

 

Are you OK with your health insurance money go dead weight? Because every time an ER treats someone without health insurance, where do you think that money comes from?

 

You can't stick your head in the sand and pretend that the current system is good. You're already paying for the dead weight.

[wagner]

How is it different? No offense, but I'm not sure I can explain it to you any better than I just did. Maybe I'll try an analogy.

 

Right now you can get phone insurance for like $10 a month. You can sign up at any time, but if your phone is already broken they're obviously not going to cover that phone. They only cover unbroken phones.

 

But congress passes a law that says they can't reject people who try to sign up with broken phones.

 

So do you sign up for the insurance when you first get your phone? Or do you wait for it to be broken and then go sign up? You can spend $120 year and maybe never use the insurance, or you can spend $10 once, cancel right away, and get a new $200 phone.

 

Nobody's done any studies on whether that would actually happen because the idea is broken on its face. Insurance companies would never go for it. Right now they deny people with pre-existing conditions because they have to in order to remain competitive in the marketplace. They do it because those people are very expensive to insure, so if they're forced to accept them the insurance companies will need more money. You can get them more money by raising rates (i.e., your insurance goes up), with subsidies (i.e, your taxes go up) or by increasing their customer base (the individual mandate).

 

 

 

But the ACA is decidedly NOT the Euro style of life. That would be universal coverage. I already see the ACA as being a messy compromise -- it's a pretty centrist idea, really. Fix health care but continue to leverage the benefits of the free market by allowing private companies to compete. It's not unlike the school voucher concept that conservatives are so fond of.

 

 

 

Are you OK with your health insurance money go dead weight? Because every time an ER treats someone without health insurance, where do you think that money comes from?

 

You can't stick your head in the sand and pretend that the current system is good. You're already paying for the dead weight.

 

It’s ok, I’m used to your condescending tone towards those who do not share your view point.

 

I can see where the current system is an issue, but as others have pointed out the prices in the current system seem a bit inflated by the providers for certain things. Why not have them “get real” with pricing? There has to be a better way than creating this giant entitlement program.

 

Look at social security, how is this going to be any different when it comes to how its funded?

 

I’m pretty sure I heard Obama and others refer to this as universal coverage, and free during the election. Unless I misheard, I am about half deaf these days anyway…

 

I’m not ok with my current money going to dead weight, never have been, never will be. I’m not sticking my head in the sand as you seem to think, I know this system is wrong, but this stuff getting crammed down my throat is not the answer either.

 

The best fix would be something that has a lot less political crap in it. I think the best solution should and would come from the private sector.

 

Maybe I'm just to simple and don't see how having the .gov get involved in something that they are not good at will help.

 

I suggested before, make it easier for insurance companies to sell across state lines (more options in the private market, less cost), but I guess the idea of free market options won't drive prices down? I always thought that when you had more options for a product it drove prices down.

 

In the end nothing I think, say, or do will make a bit of difference. Somebody else came up with this idea and if it works or not will be on them.

 

/rant

 

I will now hang up and wait to be told how stupid I am yet again :lolguy: