Political Thread Of Fail And AIDS (Geeto ahead!)

[Geeto67]

WRONG and I shouldn't even have to explain myself. Free Market > Socialism

 

you understand the ACA is not a "socialist" construct right? It's a regulated capitalist market.

 

Also, you know "Free market" can be both capitalist or socialist, it depends on the conditions of the market itself, not the political conditions. There are some that believe that a "free market" cannot exist within capitalism because of it's naturally exploitative nature. What you call "free Market" is really just Adam Smith's theory on Free markets (he isn't the only one but he's popular among republicans), and what you know about socialist markets is the Lange model because it advocates state ownership and republicans love to rail against big government ownership (it's a convenient enemy).

 

If you really think about it in theory, a socialist free market makes the most sense - everyone has an equal share so every one has equal incentive to act fairly.

 

Rand Paul was right about one thing - consumers are divorced from the product. But linking them directly to the product doesn't cure that, they are still mostly unsophisticated to make decisions concerning quality of care. That isn't going to change by making them buy stuff directly.

 

 

It's called competition. Free market = competition = lower costs

 

you know this is not a universal truth right? It's just Adam Smith's theories (you have read Adam Smith, right?). Where your argument that free market is always better than a regulated one because the cost of low prices drives costs down which means it favors cheap foreign labor. Walmart is living proof of that. in Practice a free market will not protect American manufacturing or the American worker. That is the inherent cost of "competition"

 

 

I'm willing to bet if the Govt completely takes over our healthcare, goodbye healthcare innovations and advances, quality of care will go down and overall health will go down.

 

This is largely bullshit because other countries have shown it to be bullshit. Still the patent process protects medical innovation more than how people pay for care ever could hope to do, plus with more people receiving healthcare, the increase in volume can partially offset the loss in profits that comes with a regulated price. You want to know what affects medical innovation more than the price of the drugs? government grants. Republican politicians cutting funding for scientific study for a variety of non-scientific reasons (not just religious/moral, but political as well - see my previous post about npr's story on the shrimp study).

 

What we SHOULD be doing is incentivizing good health.

 

100% agree, but a lot of this is in areas not related to healthcare. Everything from employment laws, environmental laws, Food and drug laws, to gun law touches these areas. Are you willing to give up a small piece of your 2nd amendment rights if it meant the treatment for gunshot wounds decreased in cost? the struggle is real.

 

Kerry, what is one of the biggest concerns right now in America in regards to healthy individuals? I will give you a hint, it involves a scale. You keep talking about how everyone should have "equal" care but not everyone should pay "equal"? Why should a 450lb woman who smokes be given the same healthcare and cost as a woman who maintains a healthy weight and works out 5 times a week? In before you create an argument based on the lowest common denominator because that's what socialists do.

 

I don't say everyone should have equal care. A basic minimum essential care is necessary to a quality of life improvement. if you want more care (like a personal athletic trainer, nutritionist, or cosmetic surgery) by all means pay for it out of pocket.

 

your complaint about two people getting the same cost and treatment is just the insurance model and how it works in a free market or capitalist market or any market. All insurance uses the model of taking the money for the most profitable clients and using to to pay for the least profitable ones. In an unregulated market the insurance company just cherry picks the most profitable and leaves the rest behind, in a regulated market an insurer is required to insure a large swath of people. Before the ACA, the insurance companies were allowed to act more aggressively toward their patients to make them more profitable and dump them when less, post ACA they don't have that option. this isn't a socialist argument or a lowest common denominator argument - you just don't seem to know how basic concepts of insurance works: the fit woman pays for the 450lb woman, and it does that in almost every market (except free).

 

overall I am not even advocating the same cost, just the same coverage and at a level where people can afford it. If that is through subsidies or regulated markets, I don't care. My insurer gives me incentives for certain "wellness" activities and it works, and it is more money for people who smoke and drink at a level where people can afford it. And that's ok. But for the people that can't, how about some basics care?

 

if you want to fall down the rabbit hole of ACA's economics, here is a good start: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/09/obamacare-health-reform-insurance-economics/500348/

 

I agree preventative medicine is a primary goal, and the government should invest in that as well, and in the long run an overall healthier population means a lower healthcare cost. But what's wrong with making sure everyone can get treatment for basic things now like broken bones and malnutrition?

[Geeto67]

Don't forget conservative values: Pro-Life until the baby is born; then it's fuck you, pull yourself up by your boot straps.

 

at some point we should talk about how the "self made bootstraps" mantra was created by Ben Franklin to sell his books and is complete bullshit. Ben Franklin, as great as he was, pulled himself up by his bootstraps by forgetting the sacrifices of his parents on his behalf and passing their massive financial burden in later years on to his sister.

 

http://www.wnyc.org/series/busted-americas-poverty-myths

[RedRocket1647545505]

Don't forget conservative values: Pro-Life until the baby is born; then it's fuck you, pull yourself up by your boot straps.

 

How about keep your fucking legs closed/dick in your pants if you can't handle what comes as a result of that?

[Mallard]

How about keep your fucking legs closed/dick in your pants if you can't handle what comes as a result of that?

Ah, yes! Because abstinence has been proven to work!

 

Keep in mind too, there are religious right wing believers that think birth control pills are the same as abortion, which is another reason they want Planned Parenthood defunded.

 

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[wagner]

https://www.facebook.com/retainyourfreedom/videos/1410973105604386/

 

 

And in the only political news that matters, Kid Rock is running for office in Michigan.

 

So in theory, we could have Kid Rock and Donald Trump both holding public office at the same time.

 

What amazing times we live in...

[RedRocket1647545505]

I hear The Rock is thinking about running in 2020...

[Mallard]

https://www.facebook.com/retainyourfreedom/videos/1410973105604386/

 

 

And in the only political news that matters, Kid Rock is running for office in Michigan.

 

So in theory, we could have Kid Rock and Donald Trump both holding public office at the same time.

 

What amazing times we live in...

There is ralk that its a publicity stunt to help launch his new album, which is politically themed. One can only hope...

 

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[BStowers023]

Kid Rock, The Rock, Rock Bottom... It's what the future holds

[Geeto67]

https://www.facebook.com/retainyourfreedom/videos/1410973105604386/

 

 

And in the only political news that matters, Kid Rock is running for office in Michigan.

 

So in theory, we could have Kid Rock and Donald Trump both holding public office at the same time.

 

What amazing times we live in...

 

 

Old news. My vote is with shrieking Joe the "Saginaw psychopath":

 

[TTQ B4U]

Ah, yes! Because abstinence has been proven to work!

 

boils down to personal responsibility man. parents need to parent and teach their kids and actually be involved in their lives. sex education and prevention isn't a difficult concept.

[TTQ B4U]

If you really think about it in theory, a socialist free market makes the most sense - everyone has an equal share so every one has equal incentive to act fairly.

 

in theory perhaps but everyone will not act fairly or responsibly.

 

100% agree, but a lot of this is in areas not related to healthcare. Everything from employment laws, environmental laws, Food and drug laws, to gun law touches these areas. Are you willing to give up a small piece of your 2nd amendment rights if it meant the treatment for gunshot wounds decreased in cost?

many of the above boil down to personal choices. no I'm not going to budge from the 2A as there's no need. that problem needs addressed properly not be fucking with 2A.

 

I don't say everyone should have equal care. A basic minimum essential care is necessary to a quality of life improvement. if you want more care (like a personal athletic trainer, nutritionist, or cosmetic surgery) by all means pay for it out of pocket.

agree. I'll add in people need to lead the charge in their own health care both in terms of how they manage their lives but also in terms of how they pay for things.

[BStowers023]

agree. I'll add in people need to lead the charge in their own health care both in terms of how they manage their lives but also in terms of how they pay for things.

 

Why if there's incentive to get it for free from the Govt?

 

Too fat? Don't worry, here's a handicap permit so you don't have to walk as far for the groceries that made you fat.

Don't want to work? Don't worry, here's some money and a card for food. While we're at it, here's some housing for you too! Oh, and healthcare, FOR FREE!

 

While socialists like Kerry want to punish people who actually work hard and took a huge risk to start up their own business and employ tens to thousands of people. TAX THE FUCK OUT OF THEM! Make them pay their fair share of 50% of their hard earned income!

[Mallard]

boils down to personal responsibility man. parents need to parent and teach their kids and actually be involved in their lives. sex education and prevention isn't a difficult concept.

Easier said than done and proven not to work. Since Texas slashed family planning funding and defunded Planned Parenthood teen pregnancy has gone up 3.4% and teen abortions increased 3.1%. In one county alone abortion rose 191% in the two years following the funding cuts. Access to contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies and abortions. Abortion and teen pregnancy rates are currently at their lowest and access to contraception is a major contributor to that.

 

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Supplicium]

What is the fact something like 5% of the people make up 50% of the total cost of healthcare.

[RedRocket1647545505]

A major problem in healthcare spending is the fact that we dump INSANE amounts of money and resources into trying to fix people who can't be fixed. It's hard to explain to families that their loved one is fucked. No, we've got to drag it out to the bitter end to the point that fate overrides our ability to counteract it.

[Mallard]

What is the fact something like 5% of the people make up 50% of the total cost of healthcare.

See attached image.

A major problem in healthcare spending is the fact that we dump INSANE amounts of money and resources into trying to fix people who can't be fixed. It's hard to explain to families that their loved one is fucked. No, we've got to drag it out to the bitter end to the point that fate overrides our ability to counteract it.

This is a slippery slope, because someone with a condition that can be managed or treated with lifelong medicine can live a long, normal, relatively healthy life (diabetes, for example...heck even AIDS is treatable now) but it will be costly.

 

On the flip side you have terminal conditions where treatment is extending life. This could be by years, months, or days and it's controversial as to where you draw the line. Use the current case in UK as an example. The courts ruled that the plug should be pulled but the parents don't want to give up, and you have conservatives crying about death panels, yet in their plan this child wouldn't even have received this care in the first place. On the other hand, my friend lived for 4 years after he was diagnosed with aggressive brain cancer. This was time with his kids that he would have never had otherwise and I see this treatment as worthwhile, even though it was expensive. The more we treat terminal cases, the more we learn, and maybe someday it won't be terminal anymore.

 

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Geeto67]

in theory perhaps but everyone will not act fairly or responsibly.

 

I agree, a pure free market of any kind or stripe is doomed. You may see it in small sectors where limited conditions might allow it but as a whole national economy - it won't work. The leader in quasi free market economies at the moment is China with their Socialist Market Economy. It is predominantly socialist but with some western mixed market and capitalist techniques and elements mixed in to make up for shortfalls in pure market socialism. Much like the Western World and mixed market capitalism a lot of the pinch points are where political ideology and economic ideology intersect.

 

many of the above boil down to personal choices. no I'm not going to budge from the 2A as there's no need. that problem needs addressed properly not be fucking with 2A.

 

Thank you for proving my point by being your usual extremest self. In case you missed it: my point was that the healthcare issue is intertwined with other issues in this country and it is full of people with diverse opinions some of whom are obstinate and not committed to the open mindedness problem solving requires. People like you. Once you remove something from the table as a possible contributor (as you have) you are no longer interested in exploring all options or maximizing the benefit to Americans. There is a potential that "addressing it properly" might include 2A, but you'll never know because you refuse to have that discussion (and the NRA continues to block research in this area).

 

 

agree. I'll add in people need to lead the charge in their own health care both in terms of how they manage their lives but also in terms of how they pay for things.

 

People do for the most part, but we don't have a good system for basic minimum standard of care in this country yet. That's what a lot of this is looking to solve, and we are not there yet, but we are moving forward and that's progress. I am glad you agree that we need both basic care and then leave it up to people to take it further, now we just need to define basic care, figure out how to pay for it, and figure out a way to educate everyone on it.

[RedRocket1647545505]

This is a slippery slope

 

I realize that. I'm talking about more in the acute phase, though.

 

Someone gets shot up and we dump 120+ units of blood product into them. They end up anoxic and die anyways.

 

A septic patient who sits on CRRT for weeks at a time. The end up with Mulit-Organ Dysfunction Syndrome....and die anyways.

 

An ARDS patient who sits in a Rotoprone bed for over a month. Their ET tube has been in so long the cuff deteriorates, blows, and then they die anyways.

 

Each one of these people easily rack up bills for $1M+. And they die anyways. I realize there's always a minuscule chance they pull out, but that's rarely the case.

 

 

I don't feel like there's any line drawn at all right now, but I feel that there should be one somewhere.

[Geeto67]

A major problem in healthcare spending is the fact that we dump INSANE amounts of money and resources into trying to fix people who can't be fixed. It's hard to explain to families that their loved one is fucked. No, we've got to drag it out to the bitter end to the point that fate overrides our ability to counteract it.

 

technically speaking nobody can be fixed. On a long enough time line life expectancy of humans drops to zero.

 

"fucked" is a moving target. The Flu 100 years ago was a quasi death sentence, 60 years ago polio was a death or paralysis sentence, 30 years ago AIDS was a death sentence. The problem isn't providing care to people who are eventually going to die (because we are all going to die at some point), the problem is paying for it and having it be more expensive than other countries that have figured out their healthcare better than us.

 

Mallard is right, medical advancement needs these people to be treated because they provide test cases for study and experimental treatments, but also the families need these people because it improves their quality of life. It just doesn't need to cost so much money.

 

 

but please by all means, go down to the local cancer ward and go look a bunch of families in the eye and tell them they are wasting money by keeping their mom/dad/child/grandparent/sibling/etc...alive. Go tell them their loved one can't be fixed and they are delaying the inevitable. Do it, I'll wait.

[RedRocket1647545505]

but please by all means, go down to the local cancer ward and go look a bunch of families in the eye and tell them they are wasting money by keeping their mom/dad/child/grandparent/sibling/etc...alive. Go tell them their loved one can't be fixed and they are delaying the inevitable. Do it, I'll wait.

 

Get off your high horse and shut your fucking mouth.

 

That's not what I'm saying at all and you know it.

[oh8sti]

Glad this Russia nothing burger is being exposed. Are we honestly all telling ourselves that we actually care or are you libs just regurgitating what the media is feeding you?

 

There is no ethics in modern politics. Why are we applying those standards to people that do not and will not abide by them? The clintons work deals on private planes with AGs, the trump shit son meets with a 4 time removed lawyer that has ties to everyone and their grandmother. He intended to get dirt on Clinton, so what? Clinton did the same thing with that cleaning lady. Who fucking cares. That's the game they both wanted to play. Trump was the cockroach in this scenario and outlasted her and will likely outlast this too.

 

It's really boiling down to the media trying to make people like me give a shit. I don't. I think that are quickly realizing that too.

[oh8sti]

the emails were supposed to take trump down and look, we already don't care.

[Geeto67]

Get off your high horse and shut your fucking mouth.

 

That's not what I'm saying at all and you know it.

 

Then be clearer. I read this:

 

Someone gets shot up and we dump 120+ units of blood product into them. They end up anoxic and die anyways.

 

A septic patient who sits on CRRT for weeks at a time. The end up with Mulit-Organ Dysfunction Syndrome....and die anyways.

 

An ARDS patient who sits in a Rotoprone bed for over a month. Their ET tube has been in so long the cuff deteriorates, blows, and then they die anyways.

 

Each one of these people easily rack up bills for $1M+. And they die anyways. I realize there's always a minuscule chance they pull out, but that's rarely the case.

 

And all I hear is you inferring that this is always going to be the logical outcome, that we shouldn't even try, and that there is no value. It's a very cynical outlook, and honestly it's worthless to the conversation.

 

Everyone here agrees that the cost of care is the issue, and supporting that care can incur crippling debt to a lot of families. To try and solve this problem by denying treatment is the tail wagging the dog, It may partially solve short term problems but at much greater long term costs that don't always justify the decision.

[RedRocket1647545505]

Then be clearer.

 

Try not jumping to conclusions like you always do. If you need me to explain something to you, just ask. Ill be happy to break it down for you.

[Geeto67]

Glad this Russia nothing burger is being exposed. Are we honestly all telling ourselves that we actually care or are you libs just regurgitating what the media is feeding you?

 

There is no ethics in modern politics. Why are we applying those standards to people that do not and will not abide by them? The clintons work deals on private planes with AGs, the trump shit son meets with a 4 time removed lawyer that has ties to everyone and their grandmother. He intended to get dirt on Clinton, so what? Clinton did the same thing with that cleaning lady. Who fucking cares. That's the game they both wanted to play. Trump was the cockroach in this scenario and outlasted her and will likely outlast this too.

 

It's really boiling down to the media trying to make people like me give a shit. I don't. I think that are quickly realizing that too.

 

 

the emails were supposed to take trump down and look, we already don't care.

 

It is hilarious to watch team republicans turn into babbling piles of excuses and hypocrisy when faced with their own version of a "Hillary Email Scandal". I am really enjoying all the "I don't really care" and "its not a big deal" excuses now that the left is yelling "Lock him up". Republican tears are the best kind of salty.

 

The fact that you had to comment on it when nobody else was talking about it immediately in this thread means you give a shit. Stop pretending like you don't, you want to talk about this.

 

We could discuss the modern political ethics of process and the "doing wrong to do right" paradox, but you don't really want to discuss political ethics, do you? you just want to make a comparative moral judgement that says "trump is bad, but everyone is bad so who cares" because you want to be able to sleep at night.

 

Moral Relativism does not absolve an act of being unethical - and, If you are a believer in the (ohio native son and Harvard Political Scientist) Dennis Thompson school of political ethics, you are not absolved of the politicians bad behavior if you do not hold the unethical politician responsible for his actions.